Mark Brouwer wrote:
I know Bob and I don't find it very intuitive.
Dunno how to respond further to that.
I always used 'any' to browse or search with a proper keyword. For example sometimes I was curious to see what kind of issues where against the specs, sometimes I was just interested in implementation details. Going through that pull down menu to select all the relevant packages was one bridge too far.
I haven't actually used JIRA yet, so I can't comment on its search capabilities. Yes, there are many possible axes that one might want to search and/or organize on; that fact shouldn't preclude us from picking one.
Can you also explain the advantage of such a granular level.
A typical mode of operation for someone working on a given component is to filter down to just the issues for that component, and Java package is a good match for component in the starter kit. More often than not when reporting a bug you know what package it's in; having to figure out how that package maps to some other component naming scheme just adds complexity (which is why, as I recall, we migrated away from earlier component naming and to package names).
For some parts I don't see harm in it (when we consider each net.jini package a separate spec), but if somebody (also the uninformed user) has a problem against Outrigger, he or she would like to assign to Outrigger, the notion of a package name is not very helpful for such a person.
Anyone dealing with outrigger, even a user, has to know about the com.sun.jini.outrigger package name. - Bob
