Re: catchall JIRA issue for really minor changes
ok thanks. This makes sense. Some of us were (I know I was) under the impression we needed to tag a jira issue with every commit - no matter how big or small the changes. This makes it easier for the small typo changes. Thanks, Aaron On Thu, 26 Mar 2009, Kevan Miller wrote: On Mar 25, 2009, at 11:26 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote: That strikes me as a bit of an overkill. For example, if you see a variable that can be named a little better or if there's a spelling error then I don't see the need to file a Jira at all. In my opinion Jira is, in addition to a tracking mechanism for what's going into which release, a communication mechanism for developers to announce what they feel needs to be done and who intends to work on it; it's kinda a macroscopic thing. It is also a mechanism for the community to officially make its wishes known as well as the usual bug reporting thing. Mentors? Thoughts? Totally agree. --kevan
Re: catchall JIRA issue for really minor changes
The process for the community is a community decision. There is no requirement on the Apache side. I think the right balance will vary on project. I agree with Alan's assessment. On Mar 27, 2009, at 10:55 AM, Aaron Peeler wrote: ok thanks. This makes sense. Some of us were (I know I was) under the impression we needed to tag a jira issue with every commit - no matter how big or small the changes. This makes it easier for the small typo changes. Thanks, Aaron On Thu, 26 Mar 2009, Kevan Miller wrote: On Mar 25, 2009, at 11:26 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote: That strikes me as a bit of an overkill. For example, if you see a variable that can be named a little better or if there's a spelling error then I don't see the need to file a Jira at all. In my opinion Jira is, in addition to a tracking mechanism for what's going into which release, a communication mechanism for developers to announce what they feel needs to be done and who intends to work on it; it's kinda a macroscopic thing. It is also a mechanism for the community to officially make its wishes known as well as the usual bug reporting thing. Mentors? Thoughts? Totally agree. --kevan
Re: catchall JIRA issue for really minor changes
On Mar 20, 2009, at 12:51 PM, Josh Thompson wrote: -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 Sometimes, we run across a really minor issue while working on a separate issue. Rather than creating a JIRA issue for each of these minor items, what do you think about creating a catchall issue for each component/ version combination (i.e., issue for frontend v2.1, issue for backend v2.1, issue for frontend v2.2, etc). Then, when something minor comes up, the subversion commit is tagged with the catchall issue number for that version. This way, the bugs are still tracked, but we don't have to create a separate issue for things like a regular expression that should have used a + instead of the * that was already being used. I'd also suggest that the catchall issue not be created for a component/version until it is needed. Thoughts? That strikes me as a bit of an overkill. For example, if you see a variable that can be named a little better or if there's a spelling error then I don't see the need to file a Jira at all. In my opinion Jira is, in addition to a tracking mechanism for what's going into which release, a communication mechanism for developers to announce what they feel needs to be done and who intends to work on it; it's kinda a macroscopic thing. It is also a mechanism for the community to officially make its wishes known as well as the usual bug reporting thing. Mentors? Thoughts? Regards, Alan
