I know this isn't directly relevant to this tread, but something else to consider while we're on the subject of JIRA and bug tracking is integration between SVN and JIRA itself. Having worked a little bit with PDFBox, they seem to have quite tight integration between the two such that (I think) JIRA prefixes SVN commits automatically with JIRA IDs (the JIRA number.) I don't know if this integration comes out the box or whether we need to do something to get it working, but it seems like a good idea.
Also, I know Jeremias is a PDFBox committer and this applies to anyone else familiar with these tools, if they could chime in and give us some suggestions as to either useful tools and/or process best-practices. I should confess (as has probably been made abundantly obvious from silly mistakes) I despise SVN and eagerly anticipate the inevitable migration to a DSCVS of some type (preferably but not exclusively Git.) I appreciate this may seem like putting the cart before the horse since we don't really know time-lines for JIRA migration, but it's better to get this out in the open and iron out these process/workflow protocols well before we migrate. Maybe we should start a new thread for this? We seem to be hijacking a commit message... Mehdi On 19 July 2012 09:14, Chris Bowditch <bowditch_ch...@hotmail.com> wrote: > On 18/07/2012 14:06, mehdi houshmand wrote: > > Hi Mehdi, > > As we've seen this morning, my ineptitude at even basic bureaucracy >> doesn't really qualify me to show a bias to either side, but I'll give my 2 >> cents worth since I am a stakeholder in this debate: >> >> On 18 July 2012 13:17, Vincent Hennebert <vhenneb...@gmail.com <mailto: >> vhenneb...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >> <snip/> >> Well, the problem is probably not the lack of a BTS here, it’s >> probably >> the commit message that shouldn’t be that short. And a longer >> description should be in status.xml anyway. Also, I find the list of >> comments that usually appears in Bugzilla entries confusing more than >> anything else. You have to wander through the comments to understand >> what is going on. >> >> >> Surely having lots of comments is a good thing? It means there's been a >> discussion about the issue and possibly some conclusion has been come to as >> to how to solve the problem. Even if the comments don't arrive at a >> conclusion, then surely having the discussion would better document nuances >> surrounding any particular issue? >> > > +1. I totally agree and that's one of the key benefits of using BTS over > status.xml. > > > >> The only time this can become confusing is if there are disparities in >> the flow of the conversation between bugzilla comments and mailing list >> posts. This doesn't happen very often so I don't really see this as a >> consideration we should be trying to mitigate. >> > > Yes I agree that is the exception rather than the rule. > > > That said, if a bug affects the rendering part of FOP which is not >> really unit-testable at the moment, the commit is unlikely to contain >> any test, so it helps to be able to retrieve an example output on >> Bugzilla. And I suppose that for the sake of consistency, the same >> should be done for layout bugs. >> >> >> Agreed! I think whatever we decide, we must be consistent if only to >> prevent confusion. It's easier following one rule for all than it is >> remember and adhering to caveats. >> >> Since everyone seems to be in favour of switching to Bugzilla, I >> suppose >> I’ll start from now on. But I urge the proponents of this move to >> convert the status.xml logic as soon as possible. >> >> >> Again I agree with Vincent here, that status.xml gets me every time! I >> almost invariably forget to update it, now again, that's my bad but it does >> seem somewhat redundant if all that information is in bugzilla/JIRA. I >> appreciate it's used for release info, but there's got to be a better >> solution. >> >> I'm happy to follow the consensus on this one and I'm glad we've come to >> an agreement. >> > > Yes I think we have consenus. I can start a formal vote if necessary, but > I don't think it is in this instance. > > Thanks, > > Chris > > >> Mehdi >> > > >
