I agree with Haleh, we should try to have consistence on areas common to all Tuscany sub-projects, JIRA, Distributions, Release Process, etc
On 5/21/07, haleh mahbod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It would be good if all subprojects used whatever scheme it is agreed to so a developer going across projects does not have to think about adjusting. On 5/21/07, Simon Laws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > This time round, as so much had changed, we didn't include JIRA numbers in > the release docs. It seems like a good thing to do in the future though. > If > everyone agrees that this is a good thing we need to be fairly organized > about how we use JIRA otherwise we suffer a lot of pain come release time > working out what the list should look like. > > So, from the IRC today, it has been suggested that we take care to note > what > release a fix targets using the protocol that the release is > "Java-SCA-Next" > until we get to release time and decide what the release number is. At > that > point we switch over all the fixes that make the release to the right > number. > > This may well have been the intention all along as I note that the > "Java-SCA-Next category has a lot of fixes in it. I'll take a look through > it and see if I can work out what the state of play is so we can start > filling it up again. > > Anything else we should be doing with respect to JIRA to make the release > process easier? > > Simon >
-- Luciano Resende Apache Tuscany Committer http://people.apache.org/~lresende http://lresende.blogspot.com/
