Most of wiki "module" pages were updated last time several months ago. Do they have actual information?
2006/9/13, Paulex Yang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Discussion on dev-list is generally first choice, I totally agree with that. Wiki is just supplement to record somewhat significant work needs longer time or relative big effort, for example, the luni page[2], as well as others, has shown to be very useful when several volunteers from different party worked together to bring the original luni contribution up to 5.0 compatible, especially when someone has interested in some component, the relevant page can be subscribed so that he/she can get update notification. Wiki is useful also because of mailing list's traffic, it's hard for new comer (and often for regular Harmony watcher) to see what's going on, what is most expected to contribute, etc, only in mailing list. Further, I guess many potential user may not visit dev-list at all... However, as others said for several times, it is not necessary to record everything on Wiki(even in list), and it is still good suggestion to discuss at the mailing list before/when trying to update Wiki. > > [1] http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/component_development_status [2] http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/LUNI > > 2006/9/7, Paulex Yang <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: >> Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote: >> > Good. >> > >> > Also, don't just do things in JIRA. Add the comment in JIRA, but also >> > send something to the dev list. That way, people who are interested >> > will more easily notice and maybe offer to help, or such... >> +1, and for classlib, we have had some wiki pages[1]-[3] to list the >> ToDos and to record who is doing or has interest on what. >> >> [1] http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/component_development_status >> [2] http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/Excluded_tests >> [3] http://wiki.apache.org/harmony/ClassLibrary >> >> > >> > geir >> > >> > >> > Oleg Khaschansky wrote: >> >> Hi all, >> >> >> >> There were situations when several people started work on the same >> >> issue simultaneously. This happens because it is impossible to assign >> >> an issue to a non-committer. I suggest the following process to >> >> prevent these collisions: >> >> >> >> 1. If non-committer starts investigation and is pretty sure that he >> >> will proceed with the patch then he adds a comment like "starting >> >> investigation" to the JIRA issue. Maybe we should have a special >> >> keyword for this to make a search easier. >> >> 2. If for some reason he is unable to provide the patch, he adds a >> >> comment about this also. >> >> >> >> What do you think about this? >> >> >> >> -- >> >> Oleg >> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> >> Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html >> >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> For additional commands, e-mail: >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> >> > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> > >> > >> >> >> -- >> Paulex Yang >> China Software Development Lab >> IBM >> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] >> >> > > -- Paulex Yang China Software Development Lab IBM --------------------------------------------------------------------- Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Denis M. Kishenko Intel Middleware Products Division --------------------------------------------------------------------- Terms of use : http://incubator.apache.org/harmony/mailing.html To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
