I think that having a JIRA makes it simpler to create release notes and track bugfixes/new features. Trivial changes, like typos are not worth a JIRA.
My 2 cents Enrico Il mer 27 feb 2019, 17:57 Patrick Hunt <ph...@apache.org> ha scritto: > Yea, the commit I just did was a single missing space so no big deal. > Jordan's link is to curator current policy which seems very similar to > ours. > > I know what current state is. My question though is what do people think? > Stay with the current mechanism or move to something else? Staying put is > fine, I just wanted to review given it's been a while (10+ years!) since we > last considered this and with github/gitbox and time baselines have changed > considerably over that time. > > Patrick > > > On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 8:44 AM Andor Molnar <an...@cloudera.com.invalid> > wrote: > > > There were a few typo/language/cosmetic related patches which were so > small > > that we've decided it's probably not worth the effort to create a Jira > for > > every one of them. > > Similarly, I haven't created Jiras for issues that were found in release > > candidates. > > > > Other than this we generally still don't accept patches without Jira > ticket > > and properly formatted title / commit message. > > > > Andor > > > > > > > > On Wed, Feb 27, 2019 at 5:38 PM Patrick Hunt <ph...@apache.org> wrote: > > > > > Historically we've only committed changes that have an associated JIRA. > > Now > > > with the move to gitbox we are seeing increased submissions (PRs) that > > > don't include a JIRA - I just committed one and then realized that it > > > didn't include a JIRA (sorry about that!). Given github and the recent > > move > > > to gitbox significantly streamlines the contribution process I'm > > wondering > > > if we should reconsider our process. Any thoughts? Anyone work on > another > > > Apache project that does things differently and has pro/con to share? > > > > > > Regards, > > > > > > Patrick > > > > > >
