incubator-bloodhound-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Gary Martin <>
Subject Re: [Apache Bloodhound] #467: About page should include a link to Apache Bloodhound
Date Sat, 16 Mar 2013 13:46:18 GMT
On 16/03/13 12:36, Ryan Ollos wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 1:44 AM, Greg Stein <> wrote:
>> How about leaving some TODO markers in the page via commit? Maybe
>> somebody will follow up on that commit, and actually make the changes.
> Joe filled this ticket and he's primarily a designer rather than a
> developer. It doesn't make sense for him to checkout and edit the codebase
> in order to ask for something to be implemented.
>> Why should the marker be within a ticket, instead of the codebase
>> itself? Again, if somebody goes to fix this, then they have
>> double-work: make some commits, and make some ticket changes.
> Maybe you don't think that an issue tracker should exist at all? You
> continue to suggest that we not use the issue tracker for anything as far
> as I can tell. You seem to feel that Subversion and the mailing list are
> entirely adequate, and an issue tracker would then be used for what? I
> disagree, and I can't speak for others, but I get the impression that I'm
> not alone in disagreeing.
>> The ticket system is entirely divorced from the codebase. Consider:
>> community members can spend the next month handling tickets. Does that
>> accomplish anything? Nope. Alternative: work within the actual
>> product, making changes/notes as they are discovered.
> I'd suggest that we aim to improve the integration of the ticket system
> with the code base and correct the flaws here, rather than giving up and
> not using the ticket system.
> I'm not going to repeat any of my arguments of why I think the ticket
> system is better and more valuable than a mailing list, but you can read
> them in (1) if you like.
> On Sat, Mar 16, 2013 at 1:40 AM, Greg Stein <> wrote:
>> This is better discussed on the mailing list, rather than moving the
>> discussion over to a ticket.
>> The majority of the community is on the dev@ list. By placing this
>> question into a ticket, you're dividing the set of people who may want
>> to discuss this item. You're also attempting to flow the discussion
>> into the ticket, rather than here on the dev@ list, where the larger
>> community resides.
> We are building an issue tracker and we'd like users to use that issue
> tracker. Discussing issues may be the first interaction they have with
> Bloodhound and it would be nice to expose them to our product.
> I'm willing to change how we do things for Bloodhound if there is *a
> consensus among the community* that things should be done differently. I'd
> like to hear if others agree with the viewpoint of our mentor. I
> respectfully disagree.
> (1)

I have to agree with Ryan to a large extent. I don't see it as a 
particular hardship to be using the issue tracker to track our work and 
share it out. Using svn for this purpose seems like a poor substitute 
and could certainly be considered as being more difficult to use when we 
want note that a piece of work is to be done, see whether the work is in 
progress or if the work can be done by someone else. The idea that 
switching context is a particular hardship is a bit strange as there is 
already a switch of context to commit work.

Where I agree with our mentors is that we are getting too much 
commenting on issues in the issue tracker if we assume that the larger 
developer audience is on the dev mailing list.

So, I suggest that we

  * continue to raise tickets for all our work,
  * redirect discussion and request for clarifications to the dev
    mailing list as much as possible,
  * continue to use ticket comments to record revision numbers for that
    ticket - note that it can be appropriate to list multiple revisions
    in a single comment depending on the period over which work is done


  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message