Hi Mike,
no need to feel bad. I thought we open jira issues for important
changes, like new components or changes to MyFaces core. I did not
knew that we have to open a jira issue for new component attributes. I
will consider this in the future.
-Thomas
On 9/20/06, Mike Kienenberger [EMAIL
Hey Thomas,
We're now opening jira issues for any non-trivial change change to
Core or Tomahawk (Sandbox is still optional although recommended).
This is how we're generating change-logs, release notes for new releases.
On 9/22/06, Thomas Spiegl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi Mike,
no need to
Is an additional attribute always a non-trivial change? In the
specific case it was a trivial change from my point of view. How
should we handle this in the future?
On 9/22/06, Mike Kienenberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hey Thomas,
We're now opening jira issues for any non-trivial change
A trivial change is fixing a typo in the javadoc or reformatting code.
Anything that changes the behavior of MyFaces or Tomahawk is not a
trivial change.
Commits without a reference to a jira issue should be rare.
We'd still like to get a jira issue opened up for this change as well
so it'll
I think we should let the developer decide if he wants a trivial
change (and adding an attribute might be trivial) to show up in the
release notes.
As the tabbed-pane is a major component, I'd love to have an
additional attribute in the relase-notes, though.
If the developer decides for no, it
We'd still like to get a jira issue opened up for this change as well
so it'll be picked up in the next release.
that definitely makes sense. I'll open an issue.
On 9/22/06, Martin Marinschek [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think we should let the developer decide if he wants a trivial
change (and
you are right Mike, that's the point.
On 9/22/06, Mike Kienenberger [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The problem with this approach is that the developer doesn't care if
it's in the release notes, but end users do, as do other developers.
When someone upgrades, any change that might affect them should
On 9/22/06, Thomas Spiegl [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
We'd still like to get a jira issue opened up for this change as well
so it'll be picked up in the next release.
that definitely makes sense. I'll open an issue.
Thanks!
I pasted in the revision URL as a jira comment. I think that's the
