Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
On Jan 3, 2007, at 7:41 AM, Mark Brouwer wrote:
Geir Magnusson Jr. wrote:
I would expect to see the process here 1) discuss idea on the list
2) open
JIRA ticket 3) add patch to ticket and subsequently refer to the ticket
number in discussion.
Yes. And I think that there's no requirement for a committer to open
the JIRA, really.
Maybe it is because I have to get acquainted with your way of writing
Geir ;-), but from the above I can't make up whether you think
committers can hack around without opening a JIRA issue,
yes, committers can commit code w/o opening a JIRA issue.
I disagree. For cheiron.org I do most of the work myself, but
nevertheless anything substantial is going through JIRA if it was only
to keep track of things done for the release notes. Especially when you
already have a stable codebase gradually improving and getting
bug-fixed. But I admit with complete new projects I tend to be less
bureaucratic.
JIRA is great for tracking, but there are things to be cautious of -
I've experienced technical discussion moving into the JIRA itself, which
I think is not good, because it loses the bigger audience (IMO). I hate
having to read JIRA discussions on the JIRA-generated emails, and it
makes it hard to participate offline (unlike email) or search (unlike
email...)
I'm aware of that but in case of tasks to be implemented somewhere in
the future I like to see any conclusions of discussion in JIRA versus
digging them from my email archive.
--
Mark
