@rafael, you said: they all required Jira tickets to track the discussion
and facilitate the management

I can see the discussion happening in the PR on github, but the Jira ticket
by itself doesn't do much, except copy/pasting the github discussion. Then
it's down to "facilitate the management", which I only see as listing the
changes for a release as far as I know. But this can be achieved on github
too.

As Daan mentioned, there are those things that are not code related which
should have a way of tracking. But what's the difference in tracking them
as a Jira issue vs a Github issue (they can't be a PR)? Those are point of
view exchanges with messages & links, with a final status, most of the time
without a strong link to a release number. If they do, they can be added to
a milestone.

So far I don't see how things done with Jira cannot be achieved on Github.
It's just a matter of changing habits to simplify the workflow for new
comers (and old joiners too ;-) ).

On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 1:02 PM, Daan Hoogland <daan.hoogl...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> Will, you are speaking my mind; any external registration tool should be
> based on the source. The only reason for having an external tool without
> relation to the code is to keep track of what is *not* (or not fully)
> implemented.
>
> On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 12:58 PM, Rafael Weingärtner <
> rafaelweingart...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> > I meant a way of describing them (changes/proposals) further. Sometimes
> we
> > have commits only with title, and then the Jira ticket would be a way of
> > documenting that commit. I do prefer the idea of inserting the whole
> > description in the commit body though. [for me] it looks easier to work
> > directly with commits and PRs; as you said, we can generate release notes
> > based on commits directly [and issues on GH]. However, for that, we need
> to
> > fine-tune our workflow.
> >
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 8:40 AM, Will Stevens <wstev...@cloudops.com>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I am +1 to relaxing the requirement of Jira ticket.
> > >
> > > Rafael, what do you mean when you say "Jira tickets are used to
> register
> > > changes"?
> > >
> > > I think ever since 4.9 the actual PRs included in the code are the
> source
> > > of truth for the changes in the actual code (at least from a release
> > notes
> > > perspective).  This is why the release notes can show changes that only
> > > have PRs and no Jira ticket.  At least my release notes generator is
> > built
> > > that way.  I think Rohit has built a similar release notes generator,
> so
> > I
> > > can't speak to his version...
> > >
> > > *Will Stevens*
> > > Chief Technology Officer
> > > c 514.826.0190
> > >
> > > <https://goo.gl/NYZ8KK>
> > >
> > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 6:42 AM, Rafael Weingärtner <
> > > rafaelweingart...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > >
> > > > Marc, yes Jira tickets are used to register changes. However, what
> > Rohit
> > > > and others (including me) are noticing is that there are certain
> types
> > of
> > > > changes (minor/bureaucracy) that do not require Jira tickets. The
> issue
> > > is
> > > > the wording “change”. What consist of a change that is worth
> mentioning
> > > in
> > > > the release notes? Everything we do in a branch is a change towards a
> > > > release, but not everything is useful for operators/administrators to
> > > see.
> > > >
> > > > I would say that to fix bugs, introduce new features, extend existing
> > > > features, introduce a major change in the code such as that standard
> > > maven
> > > > thing that you did, they all required Jira tickets to track the
> > > discussion
> > > > and facilitate the management. On the other side of the spectrum, we
> > have
> > > > things such as removing dead/unused code, opening a new version
> > (creating
> > > > the upgrade path that we still use for the DB), fix a description in
> an
> > > API
> > > > method, and so on. Moreover, the excessive use of Jira tickets leads
> to
> > > > hundreds of Jira tickets that we do not know that status of. We have
> > > quite
> > > > a big number of tickets opened that could be closed. This has been
> > worse;
> > > > we are improving as time goes by.
> > > >
> > > > I would say that to make this more transparent to others (especially
> > > > newcomers), we need to discuss it, then write it down to make it
> > > > transparent the way we are working.
> > > >
> > > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 6:59 AM, Marc-Aurèle Brothier <
> > ma...@exoscale.ch
> > > >
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > That's a good idea, because people are more and more used to only
> > > create
> > > > PR
> > > > > on github, and it would be helpful to be more explanatory on the
> way
> > we
> > > > > work to push changes. I still think we should encourage the use of
> > the
> > > > > github milestone as Rohit did with the 4.11.0 (
> > > > > https://github.com/apache/cloudstack/milestone/3?closed=1) to list
> > the
> > > > > changes in the release notes with the help of the labels to tag the
> > PRs
> > > > > instead of relying on the jira ticket (it requires to have another
> > > > login).
> > > > >
> > > > > As far as I can remember, the JIRA tickets are used to list the
> > changes
> > > > of
> > > > > a release, but nothing else. Or am I missing something?
> > > > >
> > > > > Marc-Aurèle
> > > > >
> > > > > On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 9:57 AM, Rohit Yadav <
> > > rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com>
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > All,
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > To make it easier for people to contribute changes and encourage
> > > > > > PR/contributions, should we relax the requirement of a JIRA
> ticket
> > > for
> > > > > pull
> > > > > > requests that solve trivial/minor issues such as doc bugs, build
> > > fixes
> > > > > etc?
> > > > > > A JIRA ticket may still be necessary for new features and
> > non-trivial
> > > > > > bugfixes or changes.
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Another alternative could be to introduce a CONTRIBUTING.md [1]
> > that
> > > > > > explains the list of expected things to contributors when they
> > send a
> > > > PR
> > > > > > (for example, a jira id, links to fs or other resources, a short
> > > > summary
> > > > > > and long description, test results etc).
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thoughts?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > [1] https://help.github.com/articles/setting-guidelines-
> > > > > > for-repository-contributors/
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > - Rohit
> > > > > >
> > > > > > <https://cloudstack.apache.org>
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > rohit.ya...@shapeblue.com
> > > > > > www.shapeblue.com
> > > > > > 53 Chandos Place, Covent Garden, London  WC2N 4HSUK
> > > > > > @shapeblue
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Rafael Weingärtner
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Rafael Weingärtner
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Daan
>

Reply via email to