On Aug 2, 2006, at 1:53 PM, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:


People have been referring to things requiring votes as
'RTCs'.

Everyone *please* stop using RTC in this manner.  RTC is a
development model; what it and CTR are concerned with are
patches.  Please call them patches.  Changes are patches;
RTC and CTR are how they get applied.  If you said something
about 'an RTC' outside Geronimo, no-one would have the least
idea what you were talking about.  This is *not* a place
where it's necessary for us to invent new nomenclature.

Personally, I've been using "RTC" to refer to the *request* that is sent to the dev list, not the patch itself (e.g. "I sent an RTC to the dev list"). Since the RTC process and CTR process are quite different, it seems quite natural to start distinguishing between the two when referring to associated mechanisms (Jira's, patches, etc). So, I would expect to see descriptive terms like "RTC Jira" or "RTC request" used. Is it so surprising that some of these would be shortened to "RTC"?


There has been some discussion about keeping status in
the wiki.  The wiki is a 'pull' mechanism; if you don't
actively go looking for it, you won't get it.  I have
updated the STATUS file in trunk from its incubation
content to something more current, and have set it up to
be mailed to the list every Wednesday night.  I suggest
filling things in there so all the various issues are
listed in a single places, along with who has voted on
patches, critical issues, etc.  Right now information is
scattered all over the place.

Take a look at http://tinyurl.com/hzwes (or at
http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/branches/2.0.x/STATUS
if you prefer the full URL) to see how another project
uses the STATUS file as a central repository of such
info.

If the consensus is to not use the STATUS file, that's
cool.  But I decided that *doing* it was more productive
that just proposing to possibly set it up.

As others have suggested, I think Jira's are the most appropriate means for tracking RTC related Jira's.

That doesn't mean a STATUS file isn't a good idea. Seems like a good way of distributing information regarding project goals, schedules, and upcoming events...

--kevan

Reply via email to