I've moved the page here: http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/milestones/M2
Nadya, can you suggest where to put a link to this page? Thanks, Mikhail 2007/6/9, Mikhail Loenko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
2007/6/8, Morozova, Nadezhda <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >> One more question: > >> should the reqs (goals) be on website or wiki? > > > >I'd expect them to be on the wiki, but whatever. > > +1. Wiki can give the flexibility of updating/discussing requirements > and their labels, and we could also store key points of the M2 > discussion there. I think we did use Wiki to summarize dev-list > discussions before. OK, I actually have no strong preference. Let it be wiki. Thanks, Mikhail > > > Cheers, > Nadya > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: Tim Ellison [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > >Sent: Thursday, June 07, 2007 5:12 PM > >To: [email protected] > >Subject: Re: [general] Harmony M2 schedule > > > >Mikhail Loenko wrote: > >> 2007/6/7, Tim Ellison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > >>> Mikhail Loenko wrote: > >>> > I've added new requirements from this thread to [1,2] > >>> > > >>> > I've also put names of the requirements. > >>> > We may use these names in comments to JIRAs to simplify search. > >>> > > >>> > Please comment > >>> > > >>> > Thanks, > >>> > Mikhail > >>> > > >>> > [1] http://harmony.apache.org/m2.html > >>> > [2] > >>> > http://svn.apache.org/viewvc/harmony/standard/site/docs/m2.html?view=co > >>> > >>> I have a problem with the way the requirements are being stated for > M2. > >>> Maybe it is just the terminology I'm uncomfortable with, that they > are > >>> being stated as 'requirements' and not 'goals'. > >>> > >>> What happens if these requirements are not met? Do you slip the > date of > >> > >> It's probably just the terminology. No, I'm not suggesting slipping > the > >> date. > > > >Ok, then I'm fine with the idea, and apologies for the > misunderstanding. > > To my ear, a 'requirement' is mandatory/necessary, whereas a 'goal' > is > >an aim/direction. > > > >Having goals and themes that we work towards for the milestones is > quite > >reasonable. People will work on whatever their 'itch' dictates, but it > >is fine to allow people to declare what they are working towards. Just > >to be clear, we would not stop people working on a problem because it > >does not fit in with a written goal. > > > >>> M2 or drop some requirements? I would suggest that instead we have > >>> timeboxed stable development cycles, and plan what should get into > each > >>> stable milestone. > >>> > >>> I still haven't heard a good reason why these should be put into > JIRA > >>> titles either. Can't we just agree that a JIRA should be in > Milestone > >>> 'X' or not? Are you looking to group the JIRA issues into themes? > >> > >> I did not talk about the titles, I suggested some way to be able to > sort > >> out requirements (or goals) and see which bugs need to be fixed to > meet > >> some specific goal. > >> > >> I guess that our goals will be quite aggressive and we probably won't > >> meet all of them. And if 3 days before milestone I see that 100 bugs > >> left and to meet goal N I need to fix one bug and to meet goal M I > >> need to fix 10 bugs I'll probably start with that only bug necessary > >> to meet the goal N. For that reason I need to be able to find bugs > >> affecting reqs (goals). I suggest that we use reg (goal) name in > >> comments, so that we can easily find which JIRA issues impact this > >> specific req. > > > >We welcome JIRAs from any Harmony user, so creating a new issue or > >reading an existing issue should not become burdened with undue > process. > > A comment that an issue, for example, "blocks running a simple Tomcat > >scenario" makes sense to everyone, but a comment saying "M2_APP4" is > >just lingo. > > > >I wonder what is the best way of marking a JIRA issue so we can 'query > >by goal' without having to embed unreadable tags? > > > >Maybe open a JIRA for the 'run a simple Tomcat scenario' and make it > >dependent upon JIRAs that block that success. Just thinking > aloud...any > >other ideas? > > > >> One more question: > >> should the reqs (goals) be on website or wiki? > > > >I'd expect them to be on the wiki, but whatever. > > > >Regards, > >Tim >
