On Sun, 2004-02-08 at 08:10, Niclas Hedhman wrote: > On Sunday 08 February 2004 20:53, hammett wrote: > > Disagree. A "component" could be anything package with the main project > > version and issues. A lot of projects will only confuse the user when he's > > going to report a bug of, for instance, something like merlin crashing at > > startup :-) Its the criteria thing? Maybe the logging.. Oh my, its the > > repository! See what I mean? > > That's why I earlier suggested that we should have a few generic ones, which > is where most users will make the report, and then "someone with insight" > will move it to the proper "project"/"component" whatever (provided Jira > supports "move"). > > Don't expect users to have much clue, other than "Merlin", "Fortress", > "Phoenix" or perhaps for each Avalon component, such a "excalibur-thread".
This was all discussed during the proposal and vote phase. My original idea [1] was much simpler, but concerns were raised and the vote went for a more expanded approach. Avalon is an early adopter and as such, we have a little bit of wiggle room to experiment and get feedback. If we feel the current setup is too verbose, we can scale back. -- jaaron <http://jadetower.org> [1] http://marc.theaimsgroup.com/?l=avalon-dev&m=107410569218103&w=2 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
