On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 05:07:30PM +0200, [email protected] wrote: > > > > > > On 23 Sep 2014 at 16:43:23, Jean SIMARD > ([email protected](mailto:[email protected])) wrote: > > > Oups sorry, indeed, it's not a vote. > > > > I think we don't need the heavy solution of JIRA (at least, as a mandatory > > tool > > for bug tracking) for xwiki-contrib. Each time I want to do a pull request > > on > > xwiki-contrib, I need to begin to create a Jira, to obtain a Jira ID > > (IDEA-2314 > > for example) then I will be able to use it in my commit message. I often > > began > > to work on the code long before creating a Jira which, as you can see, is > > not > > very easy in the workflow (being blocked at the commit level because of the > > need > > of an ID?). And then, I create my pull request on Github and then come back > > to > > Jira to give the link of this pull request. Maybe this heaviness is needed > > in > > xwiki repository (even not sure of that) but for applications/contributions, > > it's a probably too much in my opinion. > > Some comments: > > * How is this different with GitHub issues? You still need to create the > issue to get the id for your commits, no? I disagree, creating a pull request create an history about the bug. That's what bug tracking is for, keep history about something. So either you create a bug issue OR a pull request. Of course, this way, you'll not have an ID when doing commits for a pull request (but is it really useful?). > * So you feel that when people go to http://jira.xwiki.org and try to log a > new issue and they won’t find the project it won’t be an issue? I wonder how many people who are new in the community find a bug and report it on Jira without asking first on IRC or mailing list (or through comment in e.x.o)? In other words, is Jira really the entry point for reporting bugs for people or did they get where to report from the community?
And since source code is also one of the main entry point for developers, we could ask to document where to report in the README.md. > * Same question for when they search for an existing issue. Indeed, they will need to search into issues or pull requests. But Github is well referenced by Google, isn't it? :-) > * It doesn’t seem to be an issue when we code in > xwiki-commons/rendering/platform/xe Not sure of what you're talking here (maybe I'm not well informed about what happened in xwiki-commons/rendering/platform/xe). > > > For having work on Task Manager Application, I think option D is not enough > > mature even if it's an interesting solution > > Sure it’s not. That’s why it was an option to improve it. I'll be happy to participate and contribute if option D is chosen :-) > > > (by the way, if option C is chosen, > > Task Manager will become a possibility). > > Actually option C is badly named, my bad. It’s “Let the project decide among > a list of tools the xwiki.org committers support”. > > And supporting the Task Manager is not a given (see my list of cons below) ;) OK. We alreaedy support Jira hosting so we could imagine supporting Task Manager hosting but I agree this will be more work. Anyway, this point could be discussed later, if Task Manager becomes a true competitor for the simple needs of xwiki-contrib. > > Thanks > -Vincent > > > Hope this helps. > > > > On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 04:29:28PM +0200, [email protected] wrote: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On 23 Sep 2014 at 16:07:09, Jean SIMARD > > > ([email protected](mailto:[email protected])) wrote: > > > > > > > +1 for C. > > > > > > Jean could you please motivate your answer… This is not a vote but a > > > brainstorming! :) > > > > > > For example explain why the cons listed are not cons for you (or not > > > important), or why the pros are more important than the cons. > > > > > > Thanks > > > -Vincent > > > > > > > On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 03:22:14PM +0200, [email protected] wrote: > > > > > Hi everyone, > > > > > > > > > > ATM the rule we have for contrib projects is to use JIRA (see > > > > > http://contrib.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Main/WebHome#HHostingtools) > > > > > > > > > > I’ve heard that some people have been proposing using other trackers. > > > > > > > > > > So I’d like to poll your opinion on the following alternatives: > > > > > > > > > > Option A: all projects use JIRA > > > > > =============================== > > > > > > > > > > This is the current option in use. > > > > > > > > > > Pros: > > > > > * A single place for people to view and search for issues in the > > > > > XWiki Ecosystem > > > > > > > > > > Cons: > > > > > * For XWiki admins, creating a new JIRA project takes 5 minutes > > > > > > > > > > Option B: all projects use GitHub issues > > > > > ======================================== > > > > > > > > > > Pros: > > > > > * Simple to set up for admins (hosted by GitHub) > > > > > * Simple to use (too simple sometimes?) > > > > > > > > > > Cons: > > > > > * No single place to search all issues related to XWiki (both JIRA + > > > > > GitHub) > > > > > * No single place to report JIRA issues > > > > > * Tied to the SCM choice. When we stop using Git as our SCM and move > > > > > to the next SCM tool we’ll have to import all issues (see > > > > > https://marketplace.atlassian.com/plugins/com.atlassian.jira.plugins.jira-importers-github-plugin/versions) > > > > > * Need to implement feature on extensions.xwiki.org to add a link to > > > > > the issue tracker for each extension > > > > > > > > > > Option C: let each project decide > > > > > ================================= > > > > > > > > > > Pros: > > > > > * Simple to set up for admins when project decides on GitHub > > > > > > > > > > Cons: > > > > > * No single place to search all issues related to XWiki (both JIRA + > > > > > GitHub) > > > > > * No single place to report JIRA issues > > > > > * Tied to the SCM choice. When we stop using Git as our SCM and move > > > > > to the next SCM tool we’ll have to import all issues (see > > > > > https://marketplace.atlassian.com/plugins/com.atlassian.jira.plugins.jira-importers-github-plugin/versions) > > > > > * Need to implement feature on extensions.xwiki.org to add a link to > > > > > the issue tracker for each extension > > > > > > > > > > Option D: XWiki Task Manager > > > > > ============================ > > > > > > > > > > http://extensions.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Extension/Task+Manager+Application > > > > > > > > > > Pros: > > > > > * Eat our own dog food. > > > > > * Forces us to improve this extension > > > > > > > > > > Cons: > > > > > * Pressure to fix bugs > > > > > * Increases volume of data on xwiki.org and thus impact performances > > > > > * Maintenance cost: More work when upgrading xwiki.org > > > > > * No single place to search all issues related to XWiki (both JIRA + > > > > > GitHub) > > > > > * No single place to report JIRA issues > > > > > * Need to implement feature on extensions.xwiki.org to add a link to > > > > > the issue tracker for each extension > > > > > > > > > > WDYT? Other options? > > > > > > > > > > Personally and based on all pros/cons I think the best ATM is really > > > > > Option A. And if we really want, it’s possible to improve the cons by > > > > > doing a bit of java coding: > > > > > https://developer.atlassian.com/display/JIRADEV/Creating+a+Project+Template > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > -Vincent > _______________________________________________ > devs mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs -- Jean Simard [email protected] Research engineer at XWiki SAS http://www.xwiki.com Committer on the XWiki.org project http://www.xwiki.org _______________________________________________ devs mailing list [email protected] http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs
