forrest-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Crossley <cross...@apache.org>
Subject Re: Using Jira and branches for Project Management
Date Mon, 15 Aug 2005 03:52:48 GMT
Gav.... wrote:
> From: "Ross Gardler" <rgardler@apache.org>
> 
> |
> | Jira has powerful filtering facilities, email notification (although it
> | seems to be broken right now), XML feeds and the like. We should utilise
> | it to keep track of what we *should* be doing. For example, would it be
> | useful to encourage users and devs to vote for issues?
> 
> Will positive votes then help to (inadvertantly or not) prioritise an issue,
> will issues that receive null votes get put on the low-priority list ?
> 
> | Jira as powerful linking between issues. There is nothing to stop us
> | creating a High level issue that links to the lower level implementation
> | issues. We can then export all "high level" issue descriptions to create
> | the "roadmap" document you describe. Jira will then help us create links
> | between all the dependant buds, issues, tasks etc.
> 
> There is the facility to create sub-tasks for an issue, is this what you 
> mean?

Issues can be "linked" in various ways. So a parent issue
could be described, then others linked to it as dependencies.

I also see a "Create Sub-task" on the left-hand menu, but
i don't know how to use it. Perhaps see Jira Help.

> If not I think sub-tasking is worth looking into as it will lessen the 
> amount of
> individual issues and related issues/tasks can all be grouped together. 
> Having
> not seen a sub-task in action I can not see if sub-tasks can be individually
> assigned as well as the parent issues.
> 
> | In Jira you assign the issue to yourself, this signals that you are
> | working on it. I added the interactive forrest issue to the tracker
> | precisely so that someone can do that.
> 
> Does this include everyone? Having not been here that long I was
> 'assuming' that only PMC and Commiters were to use that
> facility to either assign to themselves or to others. If I knew (being
> neither PMC nor Commiter) I could assign to myself I would
> have done so by now.

I think that "assigning" means something different.

When there is a patch attached to an issue, then a
committer will choose to apply the patch. They assign
the issue to themself to signify that other committers
should not also work on it. They apply the patch, then
set the issue to be "Unassigned" so that anyone else
can take over. This avoids duplication of effort.

I see that various committers have assigned issues
but they don't seem to be actively working on those.

It seems that only one person at a time can be assigned.

Perhaps we can find some additional way to declare that people
are doing long-term work on something. For example, we know from
the mailing list that Ron is working on the memory profiling
issue FOR-572. That should not stop others from working on it
but they should co-ordinate on the mailing list with Ron.

Perhaps using a "Comment" to say what we are doing and keep
reporting the status if it goes on for a long time.

Yes Gavin, only committers can delete, assign, link, etc.

-David

Mime
View raw message