Even on "trivial" changes having a Jira is very useful. Jira issues show up in Release Notes and when end users search for problems/solutions. Even a trivial change may be important to some user of ZooKeeper who might want to be able to check Jira to see when/why something happened.
-JZ > On Mar 5, 2019, at 4:16 AM, Justin Ling Mao <[email protected]> wrote: > > agree with this from Brian Nixon.--->"For trivial changes like spelling, > whitespace, pruning of import, does itmake sense to have one super/umbrella > ticket with multiple PRs attached" > ----- Original Message -----From: Brian Nixon <[email protected]> > To: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Question on ZK commit/patch policy. > Date: 2019-03-05 05:54 > > I like having JIRAs for all changes because it allows one to track all the > changes to given components through the JIRA web interface and it forces > the contributor to spend some time upfront making sure their change is a > single coherent unit. > For trivial changes like spelling, whitespace, pruning of import, does it > make sense to have one super/umbrella ticket with multiple PRs attached? > -Brian > On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 1:04 PM Enrico Olivelli <[email protected]> wrote: >> I think that having a JIRA makes it simpler to create release notes and >> track bugfixes/new features. >> Trivial changes, like typos are not worth a JIRA. >> >> My 2 cents >> Enrico >> >> Il mer 27 feb 2019, 17:57 Patrick Hunt <[email protected]> ha scritto: >> >>> Yea, the commit I just did was a single missing space so no big deal. >>> Jordan's link is to curator current policy which seems very similar to >>> ours. >>> >>> I know what current state is. My question though is what do people think? >>> Stay with the current mechanism or move to something else? Staying put is >>> fine, I just wanted to review given it's been a while (10+ years!) since >> we >>> last considered this and with github/gitbox and time baselines have >> changed >>> considerably over that time. >>> >>> Patrick >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 8:44 AM Andor Molnar <[email protected] >>> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> There were a few typo/language/cosmetic related patches which were so >>> small >>>> that we've decided it's probably not worth the effort to create a Jira >>> for >>>> every one of them. >>>> Similarly, I haven't created Jiras for issues that were found in >> release >>>> candidates. >>>> >>>> Other than this we generally still don't accept patches without Jira >>> ticket >>>> and properly formatted title / commit message. >>>> >>>> Andor >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 5:38 PM Patrick Hunt <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> >>>>> Historically we've only committed changes that have an associated >> JIRA. >>>> Now >>>>> with the move to gitbox we are seeing increased submissions (PRs) >> that >>>>> don't include a JIRA - I just committed one and then realized that it >>>>> didn't include a JIRA (sorry about that!). Given github and the >> recent >>>> move >>>>> to gitbox significantly streamlines the contribution process I'm >>>> wondering >>>>> if we should reconsider our process. Any thoughts? Anyone work on >>> another >>>>> Apache project that does things differently and has pro/con to share? >>>>> >>>>> Regards, >>>>> >>>>> Patrick >>>>> >>>> >>> >>
