Hi Gregg, Mats (changing topic to reflect content), Good question and the answer is we definitely prefer things to be logged in Jira first, and then triaged second. The key things are to: a) assign to the right maintainer (see Wiki projects listing) b) assign P1 if the issue causes a CTT failure, else P2 or P3 c) make sure to fill in required fields and emphasize repro instructions and attach debug logs whenever possible.
One problem we face right now is that we have areas of IoTivity that lack active maintainers, so there is a chance the issue may just sit idle. However, with our move to Lite, I think we will see a dramatic improvement both in bug count/technical debt and also in the responsiveness of maintainer or bug owner. The IoTivity release for Cleveland2 Spec Version (2.1.1? TBD...) will be the last IoTivity version that is asserted by OCF to pass all mandatory CTT tests. After that, Lite will take over as both the first choice for productization, and also the feature-leader for Spec Implementation (in branches where appropriate). As we get closer to the release of Cleveland2 IoTivity and the cut-over to Dubai version (using Lite) I'll make a more formal/documented announcement to this effect, but figured I might as well share, since what I've written above is what OCF agreed on at the OCF technical F2F in Hillsboro two weeks ago. Thanks, Nathan -----Original Message----- From: iotivity-dev@lists.iotivity.org [mailto:iotivity-dev@lists.iotivity.org] On Behalf Of Mats Wichmann Sent: Sunday, January 27, 2019 11:59 AM To: Gregg Reynolds <d...@mobileink.com> Cc: iotivity-dev <iotivity-dev@lists.iotivity.org> Subject: Re: [dev] Bad press On 1/27/19 12:27 PM, Gregg Reynolds wrote: > On Mon, Dec 10, 2018, 4:48 AM Wouter van der Beek (wovander) < > wovan...@cisco.com > > ... > >> Hence filing tickets is THE thing to make the deficiencies known. >> > ... > > >> It would be good to have ticket each time someone encounter something >> that >> is: >> >> - Not clear >> - Clearly wrong >> - outdated >> >> so that we (that includes everyone on this email thread) can do >> something about it. >> > Recently sent a few messages to mailing list regarding minor issues. > Because I'm a little reluctant to spam the jira with stuff that may > turn out to be silly. (Spamming the list feels less transgressive, for > some > reason.) Just to confirm: should I be submitting such stuff on jira? > > Thanks, > > G Gregg, it's a good question to ask. I admit I don't know what iotivity thinks their policy is (especially these days when the people involved and the level of involvement has changed from the earlier days). Personally, I happen to sit in the camp of "just get the ticket filed, it can easily be closed/rejected if not appropriate". But different projects do things differently - I work on one where the maintainer gets grumpy if you file any ticket unless it's been first discussed on the mailing list and "the community" agrees it's a real issue, and that it doesn't duplicate something existing. In other words, my personal stance is to file it all, and quickly deal with it in bug triage; wheres this maintainer prefers to have the bugs pre-triaged before the go into the tracker. Neither way is wrong... just different approaches to the same problem. Do we have a current stance on that topic? -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Links: You receive all messages sent to this group. View/Reply Online (#10149): https://lists.iotivity.org/g/iotivity-dev/message/10149 Mute This Topic: https://lists.iotivity.org/mt/29566436/21656 Group Owner: iotivity-dev+ow...@lists.iotivity.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.iotivity.org/g/iotivity-dev/unsub [arch...@mail-archive.com] -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
