Kapil would you mind clarifying what is being proposed here? Folks are already free to include a reference to a ticket when writing a comment or a TODO, so is the suggestion here to require it for TODOs? Or to add a syntax for this? If it's the latter, what does the syntax achieve?
On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 4:29 AM, Klaus Ma <klaus1982...@gmail.com> wrote: > +1, JIRA will include more discussion and we can close it when it has been > improved. > > ---- > Da (Klaus), Ma (马达) | PMP® | Advisory Software Engineer > Platform Symphony/DCOS Development & Support, STG, IBM GCG > +86-10-8245 4084 | klaus1982...@gmail.com | http://k82.me > > On Wed, Nov 11, 2015 at 5:11 PM, Alexander Rojas <alexan...@mesosphere.io> > wrote: > > > +1 > > > > This also provides a way of removing TODO’s since they are traceable. If > > you look in the code, there are TODO’s which are no relevant anymore or > > probably cannot be understood from their actual context. > > > > > On 08 Nov 2015, at 05:50, Kapil Arya <ka...@mesosphere.io> wrote: > > > > > > Folks, > > > > > > I wanted to bring up a style issue related to the TODO tag in > comments. I > > > have filed a Jira ticket ( > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/MESOS-3850) > > > with the following description: > > > > > > Currently, we have a TODO(<username-of-original-author>) tags to note > > stuff > > > has "should be"/"has to be" done in future. While this provides us with > > > some notion of accounting, it's not enough. > > > > > > The author listed in the TODO comment should be considered the > > "Reporter", > > > but not necessarily the "Assignee". Further, since the stuff "should > > > be"/"has to be" done, why not have a Jira issue tracking it? > > > > > > We can use TODO(MESOS-XXX) or TODO(<Reporter>:MESOS-XXX) or something > > > similar. Finally, we might wan to consider adding this to the style > guide > > > to make it a soft/hard requirement. > > > > > > > > > Are there any opinions/suggestions on this one? > > > > > > Best, > > > Kapil > > > > >
