Phil Steitz wrote:
> And maybe I'm completely out of bounds here but I think that even some
> form of issue planning (in what version to expect what) can be
> beneficial as well, JIRA is great for that too.
Yep. It is. But be careful to keep things as open and welcoming to
volunteers. Rigid process is off-putting to some people.
+1
There is a balance here to be struck. The process that I outlined was for
submissions by non-committers, which requires that patches be submitted and
I think it is in general much better to have the patches attached to Jira
tickets than to have them arrive in emails.
I personally favor a uniform way of working between committers and
non-committers, the only difference is that committers have checkin
permissions, the ability to resolve issues in JIRA [1] and assuming we
want all committers to be part of the PMC a binding vote if that turns
out to be valuable.
[1] as the ASF runs the Enterprise edition of JIRA I assume we can
setup our own permission schemes, etc. for the project?
Also can somebody show me a good project where they use JIRA for
submitting the patches by (non-)committers, I have the tendency to
always pick the wrong ones for my samples.
That's a great practice (discuss on list, summarize in ticket); but hard to
get volunteers to do uniformly. Good examples tend to get followed, though
;-)
In general they do ... :-)
--
Mark
