On 5/10/07, Gilles Scokart <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
A second question concerning jira usage is: Do we have a jira issue for ALL committed changes?
I think it's a good practice, it makes better changelogs. However I don't follow that strictly myself, when I have only a minor thing to change (like a fix in the documentation or in a message log), I rarely create a JIRA issue for it. OTOH, what we try to do is each time we commit something attached to an issue, if the issue is fixed we add it to the CHANGES.txt file, and we always put the jira issue id in the commit message, so that JIRA can show related commits in the issue. Or do we have it only
for the changes 'visible' to the user (with some flexibility given in the interpretation of visible)
I'm not sure what changes are not visible to the user. Well, it depends who we consider users. But even a change in a comment is visible to the user who want to check the source to understand how things are working. I think the criteria is more related to the importance of the change, and to the extra work required for keeping track of it in JIRA. If a committer want to keep track of everything in JIRA, I'm fine with that. But I know I won't, because otherwise you sometimes simply give up on doing the minor change, because the cost (in time) is too high, and time is the most limited thing IMO :-) Xavier Gilles
> -----Original Message----- > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: jeudi 10 mai 2007 12:06 > To: [email protected] > Subject: AW: Jira usage guidelines? > > 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/ > >
-- Xavier Hanin - Independent Java Consultant Manage your dependencies with Ivy! http://incubator.apache.org/ivy/
