lucene-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Chris Hostetter <hossman_luc...@fucit.org>
Subject Re: Ideas to refactor Filed
Date Tue, 11 Mar 2008 21:36:26 GMT

: I think, if you give it the same name, it just grays out the old ones.  See
: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/LUCENE-550 for an example.
: 
: Thus, I prefer #3, but am fine with #2 as well.  #3 makes it easier, IMO, to
: find the latest.

use the same name if the patch serves the same purpose (in the majority of 
issues, there is a linear evolution of a single patch).  when doing this 
Jira recognizes that the patches "superceed" eachother, and allways 
prsents the latest at the top of the list with the others greyed out.

use differnet names for patches that serve differnet purposes (ie: one 
patch which may go through several iterations using one approach, someone 
may then post a differnet patch with a differnet name which attempts to 
solve the same problem with a completely differnet approach, someone else 
may then post a third patch with a third name which provides unit tests 
that work against both of the other patches ... at which point all three 
different" patches" may be updated many times as they evolve in attempting 
to find the best ultimate solution.

if you use differnet names for differnet iterations of the same "logical 
patch" it's very not easy to see in jira which one is the "newest" because 
jira orders patches with differnet names lexigraphically.  you have to go 
to the "Manage Attachemnts" screen or view the full history of the issue 
to get any sense of when each differently name patch was added.




-Hoss


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: java-dev-unsubscribe@lucene.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: java-dev-help@lucene.apache.org


Mime
View raw message