Perhaps the package names worked well for the engineers that
originally wrote the code and were the ones filing the bugs. In
addition, the packages for the most part delineated code ownership by
engineers. I think package names as JIRA categories have issues,
however, in this new context.
- pkg names can change
- to encourage bug filing by the largest possible
audience, I wouldn't want to assume a submitter knows
the pertinent package(s)
- a bug can cross package boundaries
- there is no code ownership, per se
However, I suspect it would be easier for the conversion process if
the old categories matched the new ones. Is that part of the
reasoning with sticking to the current categories?
Bob, perhaps it would be useful to post all the categories (and
subcategories?) that you currently have in BugTraq.
Cheers,
Nige
On Jan 5, 2007, at 11:06 AM, Bob Scheifler wrote:
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
