geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matt Hogstrom <m...@hogstrom.org>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Geronimo Development Process
Date Tue, 12 Sep 2006 21:58:52 GMT
I hadn't really thought about this issue so here is my 2c.

The only potential issue I see is that I (and others) often see and  
issue and reply to the e-mail generated from JIRA and do not  
automatically go into JIRA to add the comments.  So, those comments  
are in the e-mail and are not in the JIRA.  At best, JIRA will be a  
possibly (perhaps most likely) partial record of the activity and e- 
mail will be the full record.  I'm fine with that.

I'm against mandating the use of JIRA or chastising people for not  
following the process.  For instance, for some people who travel and  
do their e-mail on a plane they would have to wait for JIRA to be  
available to post their comments which I think puts an undo burden on  
the community member.

So, I think as a convention of mostly complete JIRA is fine, as a  
project mandate I think I would agree with Ken that its too heavy.
On Sep 12, 2006, at 3:41 PM, Jason Dillon wrote:

> On Sep 12, 2006, at 7:56 AM, Rodent of Unusual Size wrote:
>>> Geronimo follows a Review-Then-Commit (RTC) model.  Patches for new
>>> function are provided by developers for review and comment by their
>>> peers.  Feedback is conducted through JIRA comments.
>>
>> - -1 on that last sentence.  You don't hold discussions in JIRA..
>
> FYI, all JIRA changes turn into emails to the dev list.
>
> And based on that fact, I don't see any reason why JIRA can or  
> should not be used to facilitate vote-related comments... but when  
> it comes to full blow discussion I think that JIRA comments are not  
> the right place.
>
> --jason
>
>
>

Matt Hogstrom
matt@hogstrom.org




Mime
View raw message