On Mon, 2011-01-17 at 20:21 +0000, Marnie McCormack wrote: > I think there's a question here about how we go about introducing new > process to the project. Some of us are still discussing QIPs oon this thread > and trying to better understand the point of them, proposed just over a > working week ago. > > On the dev list, however, QIP is off and running. I'm not sure that having > working processes that some of us use and others don't is a great approach > for the project. I'd have expected us to vote in a new process that we can > reasonably be expected to start using for roadmap items for our next release > ? > > Is the release manager for the 0.10 release going to be expected to > co-ordinate the work for the release across 2 separate processes on the > project ? > From a practical pov, having to download attachments to follow mailing list > discussions is not lightweight - so it'd be good to understand why we need > QIP and what the problem being solved by it is ? > > Thanks, > Marnie > On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 3:10 PM, Rajith Attapattu <[email protected]>wrote: > > > On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 7:13 AM, Robbie Gemmell <[email protected] > > >wrote: > > > > > On 14 January 2011 17:31, Gordon Sim <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > > > > I would rather start complaining about specific commits which should > > have > > > > had a Jira referenced and do not - the 'name and shame' approach! > > > > > > > > Automated enforcement of this sort can sometimes enforce the letter of > > > the > > > > law without really doing much for its spirit. > > > > > > > > > > True, but that could be a very long list... :) > > > > > > > Agreed with Robbie here. > > We all need to make an effort here rather than depend on policing. It's > > counter productive. > > A new feature or a bug fix should have a corresponding JIRA. > > I for one have benefited a lot from this approach as it really helps to > > understand the context for a given commit. > > > > As for QIPs - I find the write ups (that have been posted so far) fairly > > useful in figuring out what the person is planning/proposing. > > A standard format which captures key information forces a person to think > > through when they compile a proposal. > > I think they provide a good entry point for starting a mailing list > > discussion. > > > > An important point to bear in mind is that QIPs are *not mandatory*. > > So folks who find them useful can continue to use it while folks who don't > > can use an alternative strategy. > > > > For folks who plan to use QIPs, I'd appreciate if the final draft is > > attached or linked to the relevant JIRA(s). > > > > Regards, > > > > Rajith > >
i am working under the impression that we have not yet decided to use the qip process, but we're giving it a sort or trial run before voting... --------------------------------------------------------------------- Apache Qpid - AMQP Messaging Implementation Project: http://qpid.apache.org Use/Interact: mailto:[email protected]
