geronimo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Rodent of Unusual Size <Ken.C...@Golux.Com>
Subject Re: [VOTE] Geronimo Development Process
Date Tue, 12 Sep 2006 16:32:10 GMT
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Sachin Patel wrote:
> 
>> -1 on that last sentence.  You don't hold discussions in JIRA..
> 
> Why? This to me is the ideal place to append comments.  If a contributer
> opened a JIRA and attached a patch, I'd expect comments on the patch to
> be appended to the JIRA.  This is the most ideal place to discuss
> details of a particular work item.

Those -1s are opinions, not vetoes.

Here are the reasons I feel this way:

1. It's a departure.  That's not bad in itself, but it
   can violate the Principle of Least Astonishment among
   other things.  Development discussions take place on the
   publicly accessible and archived development mailing list.
   Anyone in the least familiar with anything at Apache
   is going to look at those archives -- and probably
   be baffled by the absence of discussion.
2. It sharply compartmentalises the flow of ideas and
   participation.  Look at any discussion thread we have.
   Selective quoting is the norm, and pulling in excerpts from
   other threads is not uncommon.  Do you see that happening
   in JIRA comments?  I don't.
3. It adds an axis of complication relative to other projects.
   With the mailing list, anyone can get involved, even when
   they're not online, using the same tool they use for all
   other discussions.  They have to use a different tool -- a
   browser -- and be online in order to use JIRA.  Perhaps
   they even need to sign onto JIRA in order to not be
   anonymous (not sure).  Tracking something down is no longer
   a matter of looking at the repository and the dev list;
   it's the repository, the dev list (maybe!), and JIRA
   (or its list archive).
4. It limits the ability to fork.  So much context would be
   stored in the bowels of a proprietary package that forking
   would be made much more difficult.

But that's all IMHO.  If the project wants to go that way,
no problem -- but doing so carries the burden of proving
that it's a better/more efficient/more accessible solution
than the legacy methods.  JIRA is not a hammer, and project
interactions are not nails. :-)
- --
#ken	P-)}

Ken Coar, Sanagendamgagwedweinini  http://Ken.Coar.Org/
Author, developer, opinionist      http://Apache-Server.Com/

"Millennium hand and shrimp!"
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.4 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iQCVAwUBRQbhCZrNPMCpn3XdAQKH9wP9FjLjyinlKF1jIw/IWpF0RvkFrepUzEit
LEgvx4GZ82+iFJSmD4SHrHBmW/c+T+lThZ78EU1KBwFdYnZsVgRJD9eYEgmi1BYD
yW0QWvxuSZ3KcFiuwM7GQrLQtHHzdJgaZn8NbISOD4WSDR7Bp00rXxCJfa9RG65S
R72C8Y9tzis=
=FrXI
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Mime
View raw message