geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Blevins <david.blev...@visi.com>
Subject Re: Terminology and status
Date Fri, 04 Aug 2006 11:03:52 GMT

On Aug 2, 2006, at 10:53 AM, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:

> People have been referring to things requiring votes as
> 'RTCs'.
>
> Everyone *please* stop using RTC in this manner.  RTC is a
> development model; what it and CTR are concerned with are
> patches.  Please call them patches.  Changes are patches;
> RTC and CTR are how they get applied.  If you said something
> about 'an RTC' outside Geronimo, no-one would have the least
> idea what you were talking about.  This is *not* a place
> where it's necessary for us to invent new nomenclature.

It think I get you; saying something is *an* RTC, odd at best, saying  
something is *in* RTC, just fine.

>
> There has been some discussion about keeping status in
> the wiki.  The wiki is a 'pull' mechanism; if you don't
> actively go looking for it, you won't get it.  I have
> updated the STATUS file in trunk from its incubation
> content to something more current, and have set it up to
> be mailed to the list every Wednesday night.

Thanks for implementing the pull from svn.

> If the consensus is to not use the STATUS file, that's
> cool.

We use jira to track all patches and issues, so it's natural to want  
to leverage it for this.  However, I like a having STATUS in svn  
that's posted regularly as we could use it track things like:
  - What the next releases are (1.1.1 and 1.2 for example)
  - When they may come out
  - Who is release manager
  - Any open issues or discussions
  - Upcoming events (bofs, user-groups and the like)
  - more...


-David

Mime
View raw message