I think it is a bad idea to force every change to have a JIRA issue
created (or associated). This will only lead to forcing people to
add a bunch of junk to JIRA.
-1 to forcing each change to have a JIRA... common sense should
dictate which changes need JIRA issues and which do not.
JIRA is more useful to track high-level coarse grained information
and bugs fixed. If you need fine grained history, look at subversion.
--jason
On Sep 18, 2006, at 11:03 AM, Prasad Kashyap wrote:
As we move back towards CTR, can we please adopt the practice of using
a JIRA for every code change we make, however small the code change
may be.
Since we have assumed the responsibility of providing good
documentation/discussion with all code changes, a JIRA provides that
crucial link between a particular change and it's open discussion.
Some use the JIRA comments for discussion. JIRA comments are good
enough for small minor changes. For most others, it is the dev-list.
If the discussion is held on the dev-list, the JIRA should mention the
link to that discussion's archive page. Use your favorite archive
site.
http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/
http://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/geronimo-dev/
http://www.nabble.com/Apache-Geronimo---Dev-f136.html
And then, as you commit the changes, please mention the appropriate
JIRA under which the code was being changed.
For posterity sake, this will ensure that a link to the discussion is
is always available for any change that went into the file.
Please feel free to correct, modify or suggest better methods to
keep this link.
Thanx
Prasad
