Hmm, I have a concrete example:

wish: FOP-1785 [1], Auto Table Layout
patch #1: FOP-1226 [2], [PATCH] auto table layout -- dirty draft
patch #2: FOP-1674 [3], [PATCH] auto table layout - yet another patch

There are 2 patches and 1 bug/wish that are about the same topic.
today, the only relation is dependence indicator between the 2
patches, but they all clearly serve the same main topic: wish to
implement AutoTableLayout, witch is described by the Wish task (IMHO,
the mother task).

Same situation can occur with a bug.

[1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FOP-1785
[2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FOP-1226
[3] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/FOP-1674

2012/12/19 Glenn Adams <gl...@skynav.com>:
>
> On Wed, Dec 19, 2012 at 9:14 AM, Pascal Sancho <psancho....@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> Jira comes with
>>  - a new field [Type] that didn't exist in Bugzilla, with following
>> entries:
>> " Bug", "New feature", "Improvement", "Wish", "Task", and "Test".
>>  - the opportunity to create sub-tasks.
>>
>> I propose the following usage:
>>
>> "Bug": a bug report, and only that
>>
>> "New feature" and "Improvement":
>>  - contributor patch (rather than add "[patch]" in summary),
>>  - committer contribution
>>
>> "Wish": new feature request
>>
>> "Task": team process (like release).
>>
>> When a contributor proposes a patch to fix a bug, he should create a
>> sub-task (type "Improvement") rather than change the summary and the
>> type of the issue.
>> So, bug discussion and patch comments will be in separate tasks.
>>
>> WDYT?
>
>
> Personally I prefer bug discussion and patch comments to be in one issue.
> This makes it easier (for me) to keep track of activity instead of having to
> look in multiple places. If there is a legitimate need for a [Meta] issue
> that covers multiple sub-issues/tasks, then that's ok, but should include a
> [Meta] tag in its description, and then indicate it is blocked by the
> sub-issues.



-- 
pascal

Reply via email to