I would use the mailinglist for discussion because it's easier to use. Use JIRA if there are patches for discussion or you want to keep the idea for future (means: no implementation in the next week).
Examples: * "I want to implement XY. Ideas?" 1. discuss on mailinglist 2. commit the implementation or provide a path at JIRA * "I want to have feature XY" 1. JIRA (could be discusses in ml before) Jan >-----Ursprüngliche Nachricht----- >Von: Xavier Hanin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] >Gesendet: Donnerstag, 10. Mai 2007 11:58 >An: [email protected] >Betreff: Re: Jira usage guidelines? > >On 5/10/07, Gilles Scokart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> >> >> Shouldn't we define guidelines on how/when to use jira. >> >> More particularly: Should we use jira to discuss some new >features, or >> when >> we want to propose a new feature but we don't have a precise >idea of how >> this feature should look like. >> >> Or alternatively, should we always use the mailing list to >discuss first >> (dev or user?), and only enter an issue when a consensus is reached? >> >> WDYT? > > >Indeed, guidelines would help. But should we open a JIRA issue >to discuss >guidelines, or use the mailing list :-) Never mind, I'm tired :-) > >My feeling about that is that JIRA has the advantage of >tracking structured >information, whlie the mailing list is much less structured. >OTOH Jira is >less easy to use than the mailing list (especially since our >JIRA site is >pretty slow). > >So I have no strong opinion, but I think the mailing list is >better suited >for active discussions, when things are still requiring a lot >of discussion, >and JIRA is better for bugs and new features for which the >idea is already >pretty well defined. > >Anyway, whatever the guideline we choose, I think we need some kind of >flexibility (did someone already noticed I'm in favor of >flexiblity :-)) > >Xavier > >Gilles >> >> >> >> > > >-- >Xavier Hanin - Independent Java Consultant >Manage your dependencies with Ivy! >http://incubator.apache.org/ivy/ >
