hadoop-common-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Amr Awadallah <...@cloudera.com>
Subject Re: more information about project split
Date Wed, 24 Jun 2009 03:39:08 GMT
+1 for (2)  [assuming jira here means a separate mailing list that gets 
the full jira traffic]

My main reasoning is: not all issues are relevant to all people, so we 
should let folks select which issues they want to stay fully updated on 
(that is why JIRA has the watch functionality). For those who want to 
keep track of every single jira update going on then they can join the 
full traffic list. I think that is a good compromise between both 
worlds. My 2 cents.

-- amr

Doug Cutting wrote:
> Owen O'Malley wrote:
>> I think the community is better served by having a mailing list that 
>> is dominated by people posting rather than a deluge of jira traffic.
> This is a somewhat false dichotomy: Jira messages are postings by 
> people.  Folks should not make changes in Jira without realizing this. 
> This is one reason why I've long advocated that we should remove the 
> ability for folks to edit Jira comments or for anyone but admins to 
> remove Jira comments.  If we disable emails then this becomes even 
> more essential: folks should not be able to re-write project history.
> Jira actions are project actions, and the Apache convention is that 
> project actions should be logged on public mailing lists.  We should 
> change that policy cautiously and only after consideration.
>> Choices:
>>   1. create/resolve/close to dev
>>   2. create/resolve/close to dev, others to jira
>>   3. create/comment/resolve/close to dev
>>   4. all to dev
>> The problem with 3 is that you can add comments on most of the 
>> actions. So either you capture all events or you only capture part of 
>> the comments.
> (4) Send create/resolve to -dev and all others to -issues (a new list) 
> plus prohibit all comment edits and permit comment deletion only by 
> admins.  (Closing is not generally interesting, since it's only done 
> to seal an issue once its included in a release.)
> +1 for (4)
> Doug

View raw message