db-derby-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeff Levitt <de...@mylevita.com>
Subject Re: Please add descriptive Jira comments when fixing bugs
Date Thu, 12 May 2005 16:35:54 GMT

--- "Jean T. Anderson" <jta@bristowhill.com> wrote:
> Jean T. Anderson wrote:
> > Andrew McIntyre wrote:
> > 
> >> You could either 1) post the patch and sample
> output together as a zip 
> >> or jar file to jira, or 2) post the patch and
> sample output together 
> >> to derby-dev instead of Jira. Or, 3) post both as
> separate attachments 
> >> to jira as you describe. I don't think anyone
> will mind one extra 
> >> mail, as long as its the changes are easy to
> review. But, if you post 
> >> the patch and sample output together in a single
> mail to derby-dev, 
> >> then there's only one mail to review. :-)
> >>
> > 
> > I prefer 1 or 3 for the following reasons:
> > 
> > - It keeps the patch tightly coupled to the Jira
> issue
> > - If the patch isn't quite right, a new one can be
> uploaded and the old 
> > one removed. One problem with posting patches to
> derby-dev is it can be 
> > difficult to know if you've seen all the patches
> for a thread and have 
> > the "right" one.
> 
> One more reason for 1 or 3:
> 
> - Uploads the file(s) to just one place and avoids
> emailing the patch to 
> everyone on the derby-dev list, which is currently
> at 220 subscribers 
> according to
> http://people.apache.org/~coar/mlists.html . Anyone 
> interested in the patch can readily download it from
> Jira.
> 
> I don't mind an additional Jira notification for
> option 3. Email filters 
> can easily organize list traffic.
> 
> Keeping it in Jira provides a single review spot.
> And if the reviewer 
> also posts the verdict to Jira, then it really does
> keep it to one spot.
> 
>   -jean

The problem is that some fixes affect multiple doc
files.  Posting the patch and then having to post a
bunch of html files is not efficient, both for the
poster and the derby dev list.  It would work if we
can post zip files to JIRA, but I had been working
under the assumption that that was not the case.  If
it is, then would we want 1)one zip file with the
patch and the html output, or 2)do we want two
attachments, one being the patch and one the zip of
the output?  I personally think 1) is the best option
because in 2)if the reviewer or anyone else has
further changes for the issue or wants more changes to
the patch, then we have to create a new patch and
output, post two more files, and delete two old
attachments.  This can get messy, and mistakes might
occur.  I think a zip of all relevant files (patch
plus html) for each submission would work best.  Once
again, I am assuming I was wrong about submitting zip
files to JIRA, as Andrew hinted at.  Thoughts?


Mime
View raw message