Docs are an important part of the product and over time we plan to migrate an increasing number of doc sources to the Apache Geode repo (or an allied repo in the Apache universe). While the workflow for docs often resembles that for code, there are also other case, such as typo repairs, that IMO don't really merit individual JIRA tickets. Would it be in harmony with the Apache Way to open a single JIRA ticket for 'doc typo repair,' keep it open, and re-use it over and over? That would spare us from creating dozens of identical JIRA tickets that differ only by number.
On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 11:39 AM, John Blum <jb...@pivotal.io> wrote: > On Spring projects, and in particular, Spring Data GemFire, we file JIRA > tickets and categorize them as "tasks". However, it not uncommon for a bug > (fix)/enhancement/new-feature to have code/test/documentation changes all > filed under a single JIRA. For example... > > SGF-123 - Improve feature X... // includes code changes/tests, maybe doc > changes > SGF-123 - Add additional test for use case/scenario... > SGF-123 - Update documentation... > > etc > > -John > > > On Mon, Feb 29, 2016 at 11:20 AM, Udo Kohlmeyer <ukohlme...@pivotal.io> > wrote: > > > My opinion is that no work should be done without a JIRA. That way there > > is a "documentation" on what the task is and you can measure the outcome > > based on the JIRA. > > > > One might think that one could end up in a scenario where we'd end up > > creating JIRA's for the sake of creating JIRA's. But in the long run > those > > "trivial" tasks become less frequent. > > > > I also thought that there was some unwritten rule that no changes shall > be > > made directly in trunk/develop? ;) > > > > > > > > > > On 1/03/2016 6:05 am, Dan Smith wrote: > > > >> My opinion is that docs and minor changes to tests or build scripts > don't > >> need necessarily a JIRA. So I'm not sure we want to enforce this with a > >> hook. > >> > >> That said, I definitely see commits in the log that look like product > bug > >> fixes, and I totally agree those should have ticket #s in the commit. > >> > >> Jason suggested something that I think might be a good idea - for > changes > >> that don't need a JIRA, maybe we can put some other tag in that spot. > For > >> example: > >> > >> DOCS: Update most occurrences of "Geode" to "Apache Geode". > >> > >> -Dan > >> > >> On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 6:34 PM, kareem shabazz < > kareem.shab...@gmail.com > >> > > >> wrote: > >> > >> Is it by design that there are no client-side Git hooks to prevent this > >>> sort of thing? > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Kareem > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 10:36 AM -0800, "Kirk Lund" <kl...@pivotal.io> > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> Please remember to include the GEODE-xxx jira ticket # in your commit > >>> messages. I'm looking at git log on develop and I can't correlate > several > >>> checkins with any jira tickets. > >>> > >>> Thanks, > >>> Kirk > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> > > > > > -- > -John > 503-504-8657 > john.blum10101 (skype) >
