mxnet-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Aaron Markham <>
Subject Re: [RESULT][VOTE] tracking code changes with JIRA by associating pull requests
Date Wed, 07 Mar 2018 18:17:16 GMT
I'm not quite sure if I have enough background on reasons for or against
this to vote in the next round, but my two cents: I didn't see much debate
on why we need yet another tool for issues that we have to manually
maintain...the vote kind of slid in there without many stakeholders
realizing what they were being signed up for. I was thinking, sure, if YOU
want to make jira tickets, go right ahead. I have two internal ticketing
systems to deal with already that assign tasks on MXNet, plus GitHub. Jira
would be four. Happy to make it work, but I'll need fifth tool to aggregate
communications and metrics between the other four tools! I'm only sort of

I saw Chris's response, and ok the public visibility part makes sense, but
does this phase out any other overhead? Does it integrate? Jira has
integration options so maybe we can eliminate some overhead... Like
something that hooks into the GitHub api and generates jira tickets on the
fly... I want to believe there's a plan that makes this all easier.

What value I don't see is how we lower barriers to contribution and make it
more fluid for new users that could become contributors. What's the story
and value proposition?

Also, I don't see any docs on the website or on github on how to sign up
for jira, or how to contribute according to this new requirement anywhere
on the site. Myself and new contributors wouldn't know what the expected
flow looks like because it's not really accessible. I now see the
confluence wiki, but that's pretty much hidden from anyone browsing the
site or github and looking to contribute. Why is this info on confluence at
all? Why not in the docs on github that are rendered to the website? Or
conversely, why is some of the info on github and on the website, if it is
being maintained and current only on confluence?

These are two separate issues really, but I think if you want buy-in, this
needs to be more transparent and obvious, and provide clear reasons and
benefits to why you're asking for more overhead.


On Mar 6, 2018 21:14, "Eric Xie" <> wrote:

> -1
> JIRA is ancient and arcane. This adds unnecessary overhead.
> On 2018/03/03 06:11:12, CodingCat <> wrote:
> > This vote passes with 6 +1 votes (6 bindings) and no 0 or -1 votes.
> >
> > Binding +1:
> > Chris Olivier
> > Indhu Bharathi
> > Suneel Marthi
> > Yuan Tang
> > Marco de Abreu
> > Sebastian Schelter
> >
> >
> >
> > Vote thread:
> >
> 1M:tracking%20code%20changes%20with%20JIRA%20by%20associatin
> g%20pull%20requests
> >
> > I will continue with pushing the content to wiki and take it into
> practice
> >

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