That sounds about right (except that we use the word "adapter" rather than "connector").
If anyone would like to volunteer to be the default assignee for a particular component that would be MARVELOUS. Julian On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 3:14 PM, Jacques Nadeau <[email protected]> wrote: > I think we should have an actual "core" component. Otherwise it is hard to > distinguish uncategorized and core issues. Nick, any hesitancy with that? > > On Fri, Jun 26, 2015 at 3:03 PM, Nick Dimiduk <[email protected]> wrote: > >> In that case, I suggest the following as our project components: avatica, >> mongo-connector, spark-connector, splunk-connector, build. Anything not >> marked with a component would be "core" by default. This sound about right? >> >> Seems I lack sufficient JIRA privileges to administer components. Julian >> would you mind terribly doing the honors? >> >> -n >> >> On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 3:53 PM, Julian Hyde <[email protected]> wrote: >> >> > I'd much rather have too few components than too many. Otherwise there >> > is a significant chance that bugs will be categorized in the wrong >> > component. >> > >> > Avatica makes sense because it is very clear cut. The various adapters >> > e.g. MongoDB make sense also. Other areas I'd need some convincing. >> > >> > On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 2:58 PM, Nick Dimiduk <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > > Heya, >> > > >> > > Does it make sense to introduce component labels into JIRA? For my own >> > > needs, this would make it easier for me to find issues related to >> > avatica. >> > > Presumably others could find this useful as well. >> > > >> > > Thoughts? >> > > -n >> > >>
