cordova-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Brian>
Subject Re: Github, again.
Date Mon, 13 Apr 2015 21:12:28 GMT
Alas, no. Vote threads MUST be an email. Our original interpretation:
tagging a release by a PMC 'platform lead' === Vote… which, some may
recall, the board did not take kindly.

Moving from code to conversation def has slowed the project cadence down.
Our last major release was July 2013. There was a significant stall in
adoption but that seems to have recovered and really put wind back in the
sails for downstreams I can measure like PhoneGap. Maybe that is ok. Def a
great conversation piece.

On Mon, Apr 13, 2015 at 3:55 PM, Josh Soref <> wrote:

> Tony wrote:
> > FWIW, I don¹t think that Cordova JIRA is horrible.
> > We use JIRA at Intel and have had a lot of intermittent performance
> > problems that were mostly resolved with a recent version update.
> > It seems like a lot of effort has been invested in the Cordova JIRA and
> it
> > seems (to me) like it would be a shame to move away from it.
> > I¹ll leave it at that and comment on your other thread Michal.
> Fwiw, we use JIRA at work, and I hate that JIRA much more than I hate
> Apache's JIRA.
> We also have a GitHub tracker that we use for WebWorks.
> I'm not a big fan of it, but the simplicity is a nice thing relative to all
> of the mandatory knobs in my least favorite JIRA.
> GitHub's linking features are vaguely nice.
> Note: in general, I'm a proponent of being able to review the history of
> code and being able to understand why a change was made.
> Traditionally, that involves looking at a bug tracker and reading the bug.
> However, neither JIRAs I've mentioned today are used that way, often
> they're
> at best Process Shepherds, and often they're just full of noise.
> I don't need a Process Shepherd, and if I have to have one, I'd rather it
> be
> Pull Requests.
> A funny thing to consider in this area:
> Instead of having a vote thread which people can email -- and which
> frequently spirals out of control.
> We could have a Vote RC file, and people could pull request their +1s.
> No one in their right mind would try to add a long comment into such a vote
> file.
> But, we could have a discuss thread. And we could receive emails about pull
> requests for the +1s.
> Such a thing could be trackable, in a meaningful way...
> And your commit message / pull request for a +1 could explain what you
> tested.
> > On the other hand (and this is the real point I wanted to make), the wiki
> > is horrible.
> > It is barely useable and it¹s poor performance is a major de-motivator
> > when it comes to editing it.
> Its performance definitely isn't a plus.
> The process of managing accounts is a bumber.
> I'd certainly favor a pull request model (which GitHub pages would give
> me).
> > There are important documents and information that only exist on the
> wiki!
> > In one of the other threads, Carlos suggested using Github wiki - it
> seems
> > like this would be a great change to me if it is possible.
> > From my perspective, this would be a far more valuable change than moving
> > from JIRA to Github Issues.
> > Just wanted to raise it since you seem to be interested in spinning some
> > of these topics off into dedicated discussion threadsŠ
> I've seen some projects try using GitHub pages, and I haven't seen many
> where it works particularly well.
> OTOH, I haven't seen *anything* that works particularly well.

  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message