i agree with marcel. in general i would rather move forward with the modularisation and then adjust jira accordingly.
kind regards angela On 27/03/17 09:26, "Marcel Reutegger" <[email protected]> wrote: >Hi, > >I'm wondering if this is the best approach. Initially we used the JIRA >component 1:1 for modules we have in SVN. Now we also use them for >sub-modules like 'documentmk', 'mongomk', 'property-index', ... > >In my view this indicates that the existing modules should probably be >split and we'd be back to a 1:1 relation between modules in SVN and >components in JIRA. Alternatively, we could also use JIRA labels and >group issues by features like observation. > >Regards > Marcel > >On 27/03/17 07:57, Chetan Mehrotra wrote: >> I analyzed the issues currently logged under component "core" which >> has ~100 issues. Looking at most issues I think we can do following >> >> 1. Create a new component for observation issues i.e. "observation" >> 2. Avoid marking same issue for multiple component like "documentmk >> and core" unless the change impacts code base outside of that >> component like in this case outside of documentmk package >> >> This would ensure that we can get some better sense out of issues >> currently clubbed under "core" >> >> Thoughts? >> >> Chetan Mehrotra >>
