Thanks guys !

On Sun, Feb 15, 2009 at 19:08, Gert Vanthienen
<[email protected]> wrote:
>
> L.S.,
>
> A separate JIRA project has been set up and components issues have been
> moved to https://issues.apache.org/activemq/browse/SMXCOMP.  The 2008.01 and
> 2009.01 versions have been removed from our main ServiceMix JIRA, so we have
> a more manageable list of versions there now as well.
>
> Thanks to Lars and Jean-Baptiste for helping me to get all the issues moved
> over the weekend!
>
> Gert
>
>
>
> Gert Vanthienen wrote:
>>
>> Guillaume,
>>
>> Creating the release notes wouldn't be a real problem, I think.  We're
>> not doing this every week and we can always filter for a list of issues
>> being solved for one specific component and one specific version and
>> export that to text or something.
>>
>> However, you're right about the other thing... Confusing people about
>> which version a fix should/would go in would be very bad indeed.  If we
>> get inconsistent release information in JIRA, it will become impossible
>> to ever figure out if/when a user reported bug is getting fixed.  We
>> should prefer confusing people with 50-something different versions
>> then, because at least that gives us the specific information we need
>> for helping them out.
>>
>> Setting up a different project for every component right now would not
>> be that much more work -- the only overhead would be in creating the
>> projects themselves, we still need to create the same amount of versions
>> and move all the issues around anyway.  I'm a bit worried that this will
>> scatter information around too much though and that it will become too
>> difficult to get an overview of what we're doing.  Also, nobody is going
>> to notice that ActiveMQ and Camel are also around in this JIRA instance
>> if we will add about 25 projects in there ;)
>>
>> So, unless there are any other thoughts, I'll set up a single project
>> with the required amount of versions to cover all the components over
>> the weekend.
>>
>> Regards,
>>
>> Gert
>>
>> Guillaume Nodet wrote:
>>> I'm not sure how we could go with a single version.  Suppose we create
>>> a version for 2009.01 and 2009.02.  If we release one component with
>>> 2009.01, when a new JIRA is created, you will need to select a version
>>> to fix the bug in, and you will end up choosing between 2 unreleased
>>> versions.  Another problem would be when we want to create the release
>>> notes I guess.  Having a single version would be nice because we would
>>> not have a very long list of versions available, but it may very well
>>> lead to inconsistencies if we are not very carefull to check the real
>>> version when we fix a bug.
>>> Though if we plan to later separate the components, using a single
>>> version will be easier because we would not have to change those when
>>> splitting the components.
>>>
>>> 2009/2/13 Gert Vanthienen <[email protected]>:
>>>
>>>> L.S.,
>>>>
>>>> Looks like we agree to put things in a single JIRA project for all the
>>>> components for now.  Personally, I would prefer to use the plain version
>>>> numbers, because we'd otherwise end up with another endless list of
>>>> releases (servicemix-ftp-2008.01, servicemix-jms-2008.01, ....) in the
>>>> new JIRA project.  The only drawback I see is that we'd also have to
>>>> create shared filters to get some kind of roadmap per component.  Is
>>>> there any obvious problem with using plain versions that I'm missing?
>>>>
>>>> +1 on Chris' suggestion to add better release information for the
>>>> components to the wiki as well, that will also help in getting the
>>>> release information for the containers out -- we could just point to the
>>>> release notes of the components we include instead of having to
>>>> aggregate the data from both JIRA projects.
>>>>
>>>> I'll try to migrate things over the weekend once we get a consensus on
>>>> the versioning scheme.  I guess we best move a bit of history for the
>>>> components' issues as well (those that carry the odd version numbers) so
>>>> we can get a clean JIRA project for the ServiceMix 3 container again.
>>>>
>>>> Regards,
>>>>
>>>> Gert
>>>>
>>>> Gert Vanthienen wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> L.S.,
>>>>>
>>>>> If we look at the ServiceMix 3 JIRA project, the list of releases in
>>>>> there is getting very long and very hard to work with.  I know we
>>>>> discussed this before, but I really think it makes sense to make a
>>>>> separate JIRA project or projects for the components now.
>>>>> One solution would be to create a single JIRA project for all the
>>>>> components.  Because we can release components independently, the
>>>>> version numbers on the components will be going out of sync.  One way
>>>>> to handle this, is by using the same versioning scheme as we are using
>>>>> now in SMX3, e.g. servicemix-ftp-2008.01 for version 2008.01 of
>>>>> servicemix-ftp.  On the other hand, we could also just create plain
>>>>> version numbers like 2009.01 and then keeping the release open in JIRA
>>>>> until all components have reached that version.
>>>>>
>>>>> The other way to get passed this would be to create a JIRA project per
>>>>> component.  This way, we could use versions in JIRA just as we are used
>>>>> to, but the overhead of setting this up would be quite big.
>>>>>
>>>>> Which solution would people prefer?  Are there any other suggestions
>>>>> for solving this?
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards,
>>>>>
>>>>> Gert
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> -----
>> ---
>> Gert Vanthienen
>> http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com
>>
>
>
> -----
> ---
> Gert Vanthienen
> http://gertvanthienen.blogspot.com
> --
> View this message in context: 
> http://www.nabble.com/-DISCUSS--Separate-JIRA-project%28s%29-for-Components-tp21980838p22025458.html
> Sent from the ServiceMix - Dev mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>
>



-- 
Cheers,
Guillaume Nodet
------------------------
Blog: http://gnodet.blogspot.com/
------------------------
Open Source SOA
http://fusesource.com

Reply via email to