Mailing-List: contact dev-help@geronimo.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
DomainKey-Status: good
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws;
        s=beta; d=gmail.com;
        h=received:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:content-type:message-id:content-transfer-encoding:from:subject:date:to:x-mailer:sender;
        b=TJVj8QWxUtC+DZ6CcqfkURmNzVWtTU9gYbpRZFN/XxRN+T9BNwJ0p2wpQnvw8yFVBy6jPjV+sutjk7MX3nsI4T0SXvFlHURI+scsVT5AA/cY2jx9QrNQNxJyNu45Dj4epwX5vTUh2JLIxWkLEoL5LvzUaMPLEB+L3CIITGPWkYc=
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v752.2)
In-Reply-To: <1b5bfeb50609190008l2d4140a9je4673e3c254ccab0@mail.gmail.com>
References: <c278ac970609181103q1b28506dvdb396e763d0d059a@mail.gmail.com>
 <9B4D10FF-816A-4379-8CF7-E5C748C4942B@planet57.com>
 <1b5bfeb50609190008l2d4140a9je4673e3c254ccab0@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII; delsp=yes; format=flowed
Message-Id: <54C88C1E-5C18-4DA0-97DD-C7D322A97272@planet57.com>
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
From: Jason Dillon <jason@planet57.com>
Subject: Re: Let us please use a JIRA for every code change we make
Date: Tue, 19 Sep 2006 03:57:52 -0700
To: dev@geronimo.apache.org
Sender: Jason Dillon <jason.dillon@gmail.com>

There are always small changes that are not directly tied to a  
specific JIRA issue.  My point is that by making it a requirement to  
have a JIRA issue that people will end up creating more issues than  
we really nee (or want).

I have made a lot of small changes to the build which fit into this  
category.  Some clean up also fits into that category.  Say, adding  
or fixing javadocs, or adding TODO comments, etc... all things which  
probably don't have a JIRA issue and it would be a PITA to force  
folks to go an make one.  That is way to artificial and pointless.

--jason


On Sep 19, 2006, at 12:08 AM, Jacek Laskowski wrote:

> On 9/18/06, Jason Dillon <jason@planet57.com> wrote:
>> I think it is a bad idea to force every change to have a JIRA issue
>> created (or associated).  This will only lead to forcing people to
>> add a bunch of junk to JIRA.
>>
>> -1 to forcing each change to have a JIRA... common sense should
>> dictate which changes need JIRA issues and which do not.
>>
>> JIRA is more useful to track high-level coarse grained information
>> and bugs fixed.  If you need fine grained history, look at  
>> subversion.
>
> Would you present some examples of changes (commits) that should not
> be reported in JIRA? What changes would you make that don't fall into
> some kind of high-level coarse-grained information? If they're not
> part of a bigger picture, why would you care to commit them? I can't
> think of any change that goes to trunk without a need for it so if
> there's a need for it people will expect it to be trackable and
> RELEASE NOTES are one of the excellent means. It requires that each
> and every change is bound to a JIRA report, though.
>
> Jacek
>
> -- 
> Jacek Laskowski
> http://www.laskowski.net.pl