I'm a -1 on the syntax: I'm not sure why the syntax is being proposed when
folks are free to add one or more tickets in the content of the TODO, much
in the same way as comments are written in general. When optional, there is
also the inconsistency of TODO syntax across the code base which seems
+1
This also provides a way of removing TODO’s since they are traceable. If you
look in the code, there are TODO’s which are no relevant anymore or probably
cannot be understood from their actual context.
> On 08 Nov 2015, at 05:50, Kapil Arya wrote:
>
> Folks,
>
> I
Kapil would you mind clarifying what is being proposed here? Folks are
already free to include a reference to a ticket when writing a comment or a
TODO, so is the suggestion here to require it for TODOs? Or to add a syntax
for this? If it's the latter, what does the syntax achieve?
On Wed, Nov
I think we should encourage people to follow this pattern, but not making
this obligatory.
I may be wrong, but I feel that sometimes we use `TODO`s as food for
thought, not for something that should or will necessarily be implemented
soon. A `TODO` may provide additional context to the
-1
for mandatory adding MESOS- to TODO.
it makes it more cumbersome to add TODOs and, I fear, would discourage
people from adding those.
For example in a "chain", TODOs may be short-lived enough that adding a
Jira would only add noise.
I'm not even sure that (optionally) adding the Jira to
+1
for adding TODO(MESOS-) to the style guide as a soft requirement. I
don't think it should be strictly required, since sometimes creating a JIRA
ticket just doesn't make sense, but I do have the feeling that in *most*
cases, our process would benefit from creating a JIRA at the moment a TODO
If we are going to track these TODOs on JIRA, I hope we add these as sub-tasks
to the stories/epics and are not floating free. Which brings the question - how
are epic completion timelines effected by these.
-Jojy
> On Nov 11, 2015, at 9:39 AM, Greg Mann wrote:
>
> +1
>
Hi Ben,
On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 8:33 AM, Benjamin Mahler
wrote:
> Kapil would you mind clarifying what is being proposed here? Folks are
> already free to include a reference to a ticket when writing a comment or a
> TODO, so is the suggestion here to require it for
+1, JIRA will include more discussion and we can close it when it has been
improved.
Da (Klaus), Ma (马达) | PMP® | Advisory Software Engineer
Platform Symphony/DCOS Development & Support, STG, IBM GCG
+86-10-8245 4084 | klaus1982...@gmail.com | http://k82.me
On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 5:11 PM,
On Mon, Nov 9, 2015 at 4:29 AM, Bernd Mathiske wrote:
> +1 on converting lots of TODOs into JIRAs with links to them in the TODOs.
>
Totally agree with pulling TODOs out to something more visible / trackable
/ scheduleable.
> Questions with opinions:
> - Do we need to
+1 on converting lots of TODOs into JIRAs with links to them in the TODOs.
Questions with opinions:
- Do we need to create extra tickets like “Edit TODO to mention ticket
MESOS-XXX”? I suppose not.
- Do we even need an RR for updating a TODO? I suppose yes.
- Can we do several TODO updates at
+1 in general for this proposal.
Using JIRA for tracking TODO’s is great, especially for things like deprecation
over/at releases. I am however unsure if *all* TODOs need to have a ticket
assigned, so that is a detail we may want to discuss as well?
> On Nov 9, 2015, at 9:55 AM, Alex Clemmer
I like this proposal a lot, as I often end up making a point to
mention the MESOS- number in the comment anyway. I would rather
have the format `TODO(MESOS-XXX)` though, because (1) the JIRA should
capture the reporter as well as the assignee, and (2) it's not
immediately clear from the
Folks,
I wanted to bring up a style issue related to the TODO tag in comments. I
have filed a Jira ticket (https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-3850)
with the following description:
Currently, we have a TODO() tags to note stuff
has "should be"/"has to be" done in future. While this
14 matches
Mail list logo