myfaces-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Sean Schofield" <sean.schofi...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: New MyFaces JIRA structure
Date Mon, 20 Feb 2006 16:42:03 GMT
So any comments on this latest version of the proposal?  I'd like to
get started on breaking out tomahawk.

Sean

On 2/17/06, Sean Schofield <sean.schofield@gmail.com> wrote:
> > MyFaces (sub-)projects on the site:
> >  API
> >  Impl
> >  Commons
> >  Tomahawk
> >  Sandbox
> >  (Tobago)
>
> agreed.
>
> > We will release the following assemblies with different release numbers:
> >  Core (= API + Impl)
> >  Commons
>
> technically this is not an assembly.  its released as a maven pom and
> jar and its in ibiblio but we don't release as its own tarball.  i
> think we should stick with that policy.
>
> >  Tomahawk (with or without Sandbox?)
>
> right now its without sandbox and i agree with how it is now.
>
> >  (Tobago)
> >
> > I propose the following Jira-Projects:
> >  MYFACES
> >  MYFACES-COMMONS
> >  MYFACES-TOMAHAWK
> >  MYFACES-TOBAGO
>
> -1 to MYFACES in front of everything.  When refererencing bugs in the
> svn comments, emails, etc. its easier to say TOBAGO-101, etc.
>
> Jira allows us to group these all under one category.  So I propose we
> keep the existing category of MyFaces.  JIRA also has two naming
> concepts for the project.  The project name and the project key.  So
> here is my proposal in the format: subproject --> project name - KEY
>
> core --> MyFaces: Core - MYFACES
> commons --> MyFaces: Commons - MF-COMMONS
> tomahawk --> MyFaces: Tomahawk - TOMAHAWK
> tobago --> MyFaces: Tobago - TOBAGO
>
> The key is where the issue numbers are derived from.
>
> > All four would have the common Jira category "MyFaces". So they will
> > still be tied together.
> >
> > There were some discussions regarding Commons in Jira. IMHO this is
> > the only solution, that is logical and does not lead to additional
> > confusion. Commons will have it's own release cycles - there is no
> > other way to solve this without having unwanted peculiarities. Some
> > alternatives, that where discussed recently:
> > * A custom field "Affected Commons Version": What about the "Fix
> > Version"? Where do I document it. Another custom field "Commons Fix
> > Version"? No, no, please.
> > * Request a JIRA enhancement? Not possible within a realistic time frame IMHO.
> >
> > So, what is the real drawback? The only one I can think of (and was
> > noted in former discussions) is, that people will report Commons bugs
> > in MYFACES. Well, moving issues between Jira projects is no big deal
> > as already was said. And: The very same applies to Tomahawk issues.
> > Many many Tomahawk bugs will be reported in MYFACES, because there
> > will always be cases where it is not so clear which sub-projects is
> > causing the actual problem.
> > So, it's always the developer's job to finally put the issue into the
> > right category, project, component, or whatever.
>
> I can see Manfred's point about commons and I reluctantly agree.  We
> will probably come to regret not having a separate JIRA instance for
> this so lets just accept it now instead of trying a bunch of hacks
> that will probably not suffice.
>
> So I am +1 but with the changes I suggested above.  I will also hold
> off on doing anything JIRA related this weekend.  This is too big of a
> change and we need everyone's input.  Lets try for early next week
> instead.
>
> > Manfred
>
> Sean
>

Mime
View raw message