Tim Ellison wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr wrote:
Tim Ellison wrote:
Is there some way to teach JIRA not to send so much mail?
Stop using it as a chat room. :)
So what is the right way to use JIRA?
- people open an issue,
- maybe comment with a test case
- maybe attach a patch or two
So far, I think these are important.
- I may comment on the issue, with comments that are relevant to that
specific issue
Also good to know, since it's equivalent to technical discussion on the
dev list.
- when I work on it I assign it to me, and say progress started
That's good to know too, since people can get an event driven picture of
what's going on. However, this may be something we could reduce distro
of...
- when I'm done I resolve it
- when the reporter has verified it they comment to say so
- I close it as verified
ALl of these are important too :/
What steps should I stop doing?
It was a joke, referring to my continual plea to get some of the
conversations out and into -dev@
Every state change produces mail to the world - even though it is likely
only of interest to the reporter, assignee, and watchers. i.e. any way
to solve the problem rather than move it ;-)
Every change should be visible to everyone for maximum transparency, or
so I believe. It would be a pain in the rear if one had to explicitly
sign up for each jira one was interested in.
Some people say every JIRA state change / comment is too much 'spam' --
you want to see them all ...
Yes, because mail is easy to delete, filter, ignore.
More importantly, I think a model that requires the community to
individually add themselves to each JIRA as a watcher is one prone to
failure of oversight. I know that I'd forget, and I believe that full
flows like this sometimes catch the attention of a new person to
participate. There also is the issue of archiving that mail stream...
It could be that isn't as important because JIRA has the info, but OTOH
someone might want to prove something was done with full exposure to the
community.
I guess my answer right now is that given how we are currently using
JIRA, I can't think of anything to cut out...
Now that it doesn't go to -dev@, it's easier for those that want to
participate less?
Maybe we have a separate list for the jira flow that we ask every
committer to sub to, but then people can just watch -dev@ and/or
-commit@ and not have to deal with it?
That said, once the VM activity gets really honking, we'll probably need
a second stream for those...
Not sure why the VM is special here.
Not special, but different. It will be a separate group of people
working on different things, so we may want to start segmenting the mail
streams. People may really not care about VM stuff if the work on
classlib stuff, or classlib stuff if they are focused on the JIT or
something.
We'll have to see.
geir
Regards,
Tim
Leo Simons wrote:
Taking care of this now...
I will note that this makes it even more important for committers and
active contributors to subscribe to the commits mailing list - a lot of
important information is in those jira messages.
I will also note that it *also* makes it even more important that Jira
is not used for discussion - that really needs to happen here on the
mailing list where everyone can track it. The ASF has had some bad
experience in the past with too much communication going via the issue
tracker; this isn't so much a guideline as it is a pretty hard
requirement.
- Leo
On Tue, Mar 07, 2006 at 08:17:45AM -0600, Archie Cobbs wrote:
Mark Hindess wrote:
Geir, There are quite a lot of JIRA messages these days, perhaps it
is time to split the JIRA traffic to a separate list with a reply-to
set to harmony-dev. Or perhaps just have them sent to the commit
list?
Yes, please... +1e6
-Archie
