I've never turned down a contribution because it was missing a JIRA reference. If you prefer not to include it then that's fine -- that part is not the gem of information I'm looking for in any contribution.
Regards, Tim Mark Hindess wrote: > Are you expecting committers to do this or submitters? > > Do we really want to raise the bar for submitters? > > As a submitter, my current process is: > > 0) find problem > 1) create test > 2) check test fails > 3) fix code > 4) check test passes > 5) create patch > 6) create jira > 7) attach patch > > Often I save steps 6 and 7 to submit a bunch of JIRA's in one go. > It's going to be a pain to make this process: > > 0) find problem > 1) create test > 2) check test fails > 3) fix code > 4) check test passes > 5) create JIRA > 6) edit test > 7) check test still passes > 8) create patch > 9) attach patch > > > With the new process I'm much more likely to get interrupted between > the create and attach step. I think it is better to keep the > "create/attach" JIRA steps together since then we avoid the > possibility that someone sees the JIRA and thinks there is no patch > forthcoming. (Really I wish that JIRA create/attach could be an > atomic operation when I have a patch ready.) > > Do we really want to raise the bar for submitters? > > Regards, > Mark. > > On 3/28/06, Stepan Mishura <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Hi, >> >> We agreed some time ago to mark regression tests with comments that includes >> a reference to JIRA issue. >> There were no objections and I believe this is the good rule so I'd like to >> ask everybody to follow it. >> I've update testing wiki page to fix this agreement (see >> http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/Testing_Convention) >> >> Thanks, >> Stepan. > > -- > Mark Hindess <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > IBM Java Technology Centre, UK. > -- Tim Ellison ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) IBM Java technology centre, UK.
