On 05/11/2015 02:53 PM, Sean Busbey wrote:
On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 4:26 PM, Ryan Blue <[email protected]> wrote:
I disagree. I think we all agree there's value to having separate commits,
but logical breakdown of a task often goes into detail that, when mirrored
into JIRA without reason, is just busy work.
What value does an issue provide if there is no discussion and it is just
a box to tick when working on another issue?
rb
I don't think we all agree there's value to having separate commits. The
time when I think it's valuable is precisely when the sub-tasks are
actually something that might benefit from additional discussion or reviews
on jira.
I guess that explains the difference in opinion then. I think that there
are cases where separating work across commits can make maintenance easier.
For example, I just had a case in Parquet where I extended an existing
API and added tests for a new method, then moved other parts of the
codebase to the new version to fix a performance regression. I think
that logical division makes sense, but I don't see value in separating
them into two issues.
rb
--
Ryan Blue
Software Engineer
Cloudera, Inc.
