I'm a little bit concerned about a certain ticket issued by one of our programmers. He's using this ticket as a placeholder for minor issues that don't have tickets. For example:
1. He fixed a minor spelling error in a field 2. He changed the background color of a form 3. He changed the name of a column in a database Since he thinks that all these are too minor to be issued their own tickets, he simply commits each of the above changes one by one while referencing this "generic" ticket. In other words, the generic ticket's lifespan is infinite and may never close. There is also another ticket for deprecated or deleted files. That is, if the programmer deletes a file no longer in use in the project he will then commit his latest copy and in the commit message type in something like "re #40". Where #40 is the ticket number for another generic ticket whose purpose is to log all the commits where files where removed from the project. In my mind, I disagree about how the ticket is being used because they are supposed to initiate action rather than just record it. Furthermore, tickets should have a finite lifespan. On the other hand, I also understand that keeping a logfile of deleted files or minor issue resolutions might be of some use to the programmer. My questions then are: 1. Is this an acceptable way of using the ticketing system? 2. If not, what other convenient way is available that will allow the programmer to log minor changes and file deletions without using a ticket? Mark _______________________________________________ Trac mailing list [email protected] http://lists.edgewall.com/mailman/listinfo/trac
