db-derby-commits mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Apache Wiki <wikidi...@apache.org>
Subject [Db-derby Wiki] Update of "ModuleVersioningGuidelinesReview" by DavidVanCouvering
Date Fri, 23 Sep 2005 03:38:50 GMT
Dear Wiki user,

You have subscribed to a wiki page or wiki category on "Db-derby Wiki" for change notification.

The following page has been changed by DavidVanCouvering:
http://wiki.apache.org/db-derby/ModuleVersioningGuidelinesReview

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
     * The Status column is used to track whether the comment is still open or closed
     * The Discussion column allows for a back-and-forth discussion.  Each comment in this
column is a new paragraph and is prefixed by the initials of the person adding to the discussion
  
- Item EXMPL1 is an example of what this looks like.
+ If a particular item engenders a '''lot''' of discussion, you can create a new page for
the discussion and link to it in the Discussion column.
  
- The value of this is that each comment is tracked separately and can be resolved separately,
without a huge long email thread where concerns and issues easily gets lost and everyone gets
overwhelmed by email.
+ The value of this approach is that each comment is tracked separately and can be resolved
separately, without a huge long email thread where concerns and issues easily gets lost and
everyone gets overwhelmed by email.
  
  ||'''Id'''||'''Ref'''||'''Comment'''||'''Status'''||'''Discussion'''||
- ||EXMPL1||Introduction||Are you sure we want to ref Jakarta Commons?||Unresolved||DVC: I
think it's great to use something that's already there BDF: But are they really covering the
same ground? JB: I think this is very similar||
- ||DJD1||ProductVersionHolder||I think PVH is overkill for a version on common code, why
not a simple integer?||Unresolved||DJD Don't force commonality just because classes or concepts
seem to be somewhat similar. JNB: PVH is overkill but an int is too simple. I'd rather see
a feature mechanism. We should be concerned about coupling to common due to the versioning
mechanism||
+ ||DJD1||`ProductVersionHolder`||I think PVH is overkill for a version on common code, why
not a simple integer?||Unresolved||'''DJD:''' Don't force commonality just because classes
or concepts seem to be somewhat similar. [[BR]]'''JNB''': PVH is overkill but an int is too
simple. I'd rather see a feature mechanism. We should be concerned about coupling to common
due to the versioning mechanism [[BR]]'''DVC:''' Jeremy created an addendum to this comment
with an email, so I am moving the discussion of this item to ModuleVersioningGuidelinesReviewDjd1||
  

Mime
View raw message