geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Kevan Miller <kevan.mil...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Terminology and status
Date Wed, 02 Aug 2006 21:22:55 GMT

On Aug 2, 2006, at 1:53 PM, 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.

Personally, I've been using "RTC" to refer to the *request* that is  
sent to the dev list, not the patch itself (e.g. "I sent an RTC to  
the dev list"). Since the RTC process and CTR process are quite  
different, it seems quite natural to start distinguishing between the  
two when referring to associated mechanisms (Jira's, patches, etc).  
So, I would expect to see descriptive terms like "RTC Jira" or "RTC  
request" used. Is it so surprising that some of these would be  
shortened to "RTC"?

>
> 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.  I suggest
> filling things in there so all the various issues are
> listed in a single places, along with who has voted on
> patches, critical issues, etc.  Right now information is
> scattered all over the place.
>
> Take a look at http://tinyurl.com/hzwes (or at
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/httpd/httpd/branches/2.0.x/STATUS
> if you prefer the full URL) to see how another project
> uses the STATUS file as a central repository of such
> info.
>
> If the consensus is to not use the STATUS file, that's
> cool.  But I decided that *doing* it was more productive
> that just proposing to possibly set it up.

As others have suggested, I think Jira's are the most appropriate  
means for tracking RTC related Jira's.

That doesn't mean a STATUS file isn't a good idea. Seems like a good  
way of distributing information regarding project goals, schedules,  
and upcoming events...

--kevan 

Mime
View raw message