On Mon, Nov 10, 2014 at 3:41 PM, Daniel Beck <[email protected]> wrote:
> However, as an example, there are over 30 plugins whose short name contain
> 'jenkins', about a dozen of them are using it as prefix. Needless to say,
> this is redundant and makes the components more difficult to find.
>
> And then there are plugins like those I mentioned whose display names are
> significantly different from their real names, for whatever reasons.
So what is our policy for JIRA component names? IMO they should either
follow mechanically from existing metadata (GH repo name or
"${shortName}-plugin"), or be explicitly friendly (using names found
e.g. in the wiki, or in <name>). I tend to prefer the former, so that
we can write automations that work with JIRA without an extra level of
indirection to look up the JIRA component name.
The worst possible scenario (to my mind) is that 95+% of plugins
follow a convention, but then a few do not—then you think your
procedure is working, but really it is wrong.
> then require them to use that short name to file an issue against a specific
> plugin.
Well, this is one of several things that requires somewhat advanced
knowledge to file a *useful* bug report. Ubuntu, for example, uses
dpkg names in its tracker, and does not encourage you to file new bugs
directly in its tracker; it offers a tool for generating a bug report,
which includes searching for duplicates, picking the right internal
component, and gathering diagnostics.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"Jenkins Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email
to [email protected].
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
