> > Should we create JIRA for these so that the work to be done on these does > not get lost?
... or should we schedule a doc blitz to take care of as many as possible right away? (Inclusive OR.) -- Lefty On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 10:35 PM, kulkarni.swar...@gmail.com < kulkarni.swar...@gmail.com> wrote: > A few more from older releases: > > *0.10*: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-2397?jql=project%20%3D%20HIVE%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20TODOC10%20AND%20status%20in%20(Resolved%2C%20Closed)%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC > > *0.11:* > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-3073?jql=project%20%3D%20HIVE%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20TODOC11%20AND%20status%20in%20(Resolved%2C%20Closed)%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC > > *0.12:* > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-5161?jql=project%20%3D%20HIVE%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20TODOC12%20AND%20status%20in%20(Resolved%2C%20Closed)%20ORDER%20BY%20priority%20DESC > > Should we create JIRA for these so that the work to be done on these does > not get lost? > > > > On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 5:59 PM, Lefty Leverenz <leftylever...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Agreed, deleting TODOC## simplifies the labels field, so we should just > use > > comments to keep track of docs done. > > > > Besides, doc tasks can get complicated -- my gmail inbox has a few > messages > > with simultaneous done and to-do labels -- so comments are best for > > tracking progress. Also, as Szehon noticed, links in the comments make > it > > easy to find the docs. > > > > +1 on (a): delete TODOCs when done; don't add any new labels. > > > > -- Lefty > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 1:31 PM, kulkarni.swar...@gmail.com < > > kulkarni.swar...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > +1 on deleting the TODOC tag as I think it's assumed by default that > once > > > an enhancement is done, it will be doc'ed. We may consider adding an > > > additional "docdone" tag but I think we can instead just wait for a +1 > > from > > > the contributor that the documentation is satisfactory (and assume a > > > implicit +1 for no reply) before deleting the TODOC tag. > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 1:32 PM, Szehon Ho <sze...@cloudera.com> > wrote: > > > > > > > Yea, I'd imagine the TODOC tag pollutes the query of TODOC's and > > confuses > > > > the state of a JIRA, so its probably best to remove it. > > > > > > > > The idea of "docdone" is to query what docs got produced and needs > > > review? > > > > It might be nice to have a tag for that, to easily signal to > > contributor > > > > or interested parties to take a look. > > > > > > > > On a side note, I already find very helpful your JIRA comments with > > links > > > > to doc-wikis, both to inform the contributor and just as reference > for > > > > others. Thanks again for the great work. > > > > > > > > > > > > On Fri, Jun 13, 2014 at 1:33 AM, Lefty Leverenz < > > leftylever...@gmail.com > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > One more question: what should we do after the documentation is > done > > > > for a > > > > > JIRA ticket? > > > > > > > > > > (a) Just remove the TODOC## label. > > > > > (b) Replace TODOC## with docdone (no caps, no version number). > > > > > (c) Add a docdone label but keep TODOC##. > > > > > (d) Something else. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- Lefty > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thu, Jun 12, 2014 at 12:54 PM, Brock Noland <br...@cloudera.com > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > Thank you guys! This is great work. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 6:20 PM, kulkarni.swar...@gmail.com < > > > > > > kulkarni.swar...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > Going through the issues, I think overall Lefty did an awesome > > job > > > > > > catching > > > > > > > and documenting most of them in time. Following are some of the > > > 0.13 > > > > > and > > > > > > > 0.14 ones which I found which either do not have documentation > or > > > > have > > > > > > > outdated one and probably need one to be consumeable. > > Contributors, > > > > > feel > > > > > > > free to remove the label if you disagree. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *TODOC13:* > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-6827?jql=project%20%3D%20HIVE%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20TODOC13%20AND%20status%20in%20(Resolved%2C%20Closed) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > *TODOC14:* > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HIVE-6999?jql=project%20%3D%20HIVE%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20TODOC14%20AND%20status%20in%20(Resolved%2C%20Closed) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'll continue digging through the queue going backwards to 0.12 > > and > > > > > 0.11 > > > > > > > and see if I find similar stuff there as well. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Wed, Jun 11, 2014 at 10:36 AM, kulkarni.swar...@gmail.com < > > > > > > > kulkarni.swar...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Feel free to label such jiras with this keyword and ask the > > > > > > > contributors > > > > > > > > for more information if you need any. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Cool. I'll start chugging through the queue today adding > labels > > > as > > > > > apt. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tue, Jun 10, 2014 at 9:45 PM, Thejas Nair < > > > > the...@hortonworks.com > > > > > > > > > > > > > > wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > >> > Shall we lump 0.13.0 and 0.13.1 doc tasks as TODOC13? > > > > > > > >> Sounds good to me. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > >> -- > > > > > > > >> CONFIDENTIALITY NOTICE > > > > > > > >> NOTICE: This message is intended for the use of the > individual > > > or > > > > > > entity > > > > > > > >> to > > > > > > > >> which it is addressed and may contain information that is > > > > > > confidential, > > > > > > > >> privileged and exempt from disclosure under applicable law. > If > > > the > > > > > > > reader > > > > > > > >> of this message is not the intended recipient, you are > hereby > > > > > notified > > > > > > > >> that > > > > > > > >> any printing, copying, dissemination, distribution, > disclosure > > > or > > > > > > > >> forwarding of this communication is strictly prohibited. If > > you > > > > have > > > > > > > >> received this communication in error, please contact the > > sender > > > > > > > >> immediately > > > > > > > >> and delete it from your system. Thank You. > > > > > > > >> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > > Swarnim > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > > > > > Swarnim > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Swarnim > > > > > > > > > -- > Swarnim >
