myfaces-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Scott O'Bryan <darkar...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [PORTAL] Adding some components to JIRA
Date Thu, 18 Oct 2007 21:49:09 GMT
Hmm.  +1 to PortletBridge.  It's the closest we have to what the 
subproject is likely to be named.

Scott

Mike Kienenberger wrote:
> Either a codename or PortletBridge would make the most sense to me.
>
> On 10/18/07, Michael Freedman <michael.freedman@oracle.com> wrote:
>   
>>  Any chance we can keep it simple/straightforward -- the other Keys seem to
>> do this ... like:
>>  Portlet Bridge
>>  Bridge
>>  Portlet
>>  PltBridge
>>  PBridge
>>
>>    -Mike-
>>
>>
>>  Manfred Geiler wrote:
>>  Done.
>>
>> BTW, I remember a discussion about the Jira key "JSR301". Reason for
>> the discussion was that it's no ideal name, because there might be a
>> time after jsr 301...
>> Well, renaming a Jira key is not possible.
>> What I could do is create a knew Jira project and bulk move all issues.
>> But first we would have to find a proper key.
>> MFPB for MyFaces portlet bridge?
>> or JSFPB?
>> Other suggestions?
>>
>> --Manfred
>>
>>
>> On 10/18/07, Scott O'Bryan <darkarena@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>  Sure Manfred. If you would. I can then go and assign the existing Jira
>> tickets in the appropriate categories.
>>
>> BTW, thanks sooo much for all your help in this...
>>
>> Scott
>>
>> Manfred Geiler wrote:
>>
>>
>>  So, there would be 4 new Jira "components" for the bridge:
>>  api
>>  impl
>>  documentation
>>  testing
>>
>> right?
>> should I add them right now?
>>
>> --Manfred
>>
>>
>> On 10/18/07, Scott O'Bryan <darkarena@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>>  Hey guys, assuming there are not objections from incubator, I'm doing
>> what I can to try to get the bridge project ready so we can hit the
>> ground running. I was wondering what you guys thought about adding a
>> couple of components to the jsr-301 jira project.
>>
>> First off, I would like to add impl and api components to this project.
>> As an R.I., the api for this project will be largely dictated by the
>> spec. Therefore bugs filed against the API should be handled with more
>> scrutiny then changes to impl need to be.
>>
>> Secondly, I would like to see a separate component for documentation as
>> I will expect there will be a lot added here.
>>
>> Third, it MIGHT be nice to add a "testing" component. I know that
>> testing tasks could be included in the api and impl components, but part
>> of the requirements for the testing suite for this project should be
>> able ensuring compliance with the TCK. As an R.I., I know I personally
>> would want to see these tests be as accurate as possible to ensure that
>> the R.I. correctly implements the JSR-301 specification.
>>
>> What do you guys think?
>>
>> Regards,
>>  Scott
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>     
>
>   


Mime
View raw message