nifi-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Andy Christianson <achristian...@hortonworks.com>
Subject Re: Separate MiNiFi projects in JIRA
Date Tue, 22 Aug 2017 16:00:00 GMT
+1

On 8/22/17, 11:57 AM, "Kevin Doran" <kdoran.apache@gmail.com> wrote:

    Clones can cross projects. I'm a +1 for the suggestion of separate projects so as to keep
a 1-to-1 between projects and repos. Related tickets can be linked or cloned to provide context
when applicable.
    
    Thanks,
    Kevin
    
    On 8/22/17, 11:45, "Jeff Zemerick" <jzemerick@apache.org> wrote:
    
        When I briefly looked through the tickets last week none stood out to me as
        applying to both projects. Granted, some potentially could like changing
        the Docker base image. With pull requests and GitHub I am of the opinion
        there should be a one-to-one-to-one correlation between ticket, pull
        request, and project. I know you can Clone a ticket but I don't know if
        it's possible to move the clone to a different project.
        
        On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 11:38 AM, Tony Kurc <trkurc@gmail.com> wrote:
        
        > If there is a ticket that applies to multiple implementations, separate
        > jira projects makes that a bit more complicated. How often is that likely
        > to happen?
        >
        > On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 10:44 AM, Joe Witt <joe.witt@gmail.com> wrote:
        >
        > > Since changing the permissions on requirement for a given field and
        > > creating a new JIRA project both require ASF infra (i believe) then
        > > perhaps we should just go with the JIRA project route as that is
        > > cleaner/easier in the long run.
        > >
        > > What do ya'll think?
        > >
        > > On Tue, Aug 22, 2017 at 10:33 AM, Kevin Doran <kdoran.apache@gmail.com>
        > > wrote:
        > > > I agree that would be an improvement to my suggestion of making the
        > > existing Component field required. As to feasibility, I leave that up to
        > > someone that has more experience working with ASF infra to administer
        > these
        > > ASF JIRA projects (Aldrin?).
        > > >
        > > > -Kevin
        > > >
        > > > On 8/21/17, 15:00, "Jeff Zemerick" <jzemerick@apache.org> wrote:
        > > >
        > > >     Would it be possible to use a JIRA custom field (that's required)
        > > called
        > > >     "Implementation" or something similarly named with choices of C++
        > > and Java?
        > > >     With more than just Java and C++ for components I'm afraid those
        > two
        > > >     choices might be overlooked when a ticket is created.
        > > >
        > > >     On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 11:37 AM, Andy Christianson <
        > > >     achristianson@hortonworks.com> wrote:
        > > >
        > > >     > Making it required sounds like an improvement, at the very
least.
        > > >     >
        > > >     > -Andy I.C.
        > > >     > ________________________________________
        > > >     > From: Kevin Doran <kdoran.apache@gmail.com>
        > > >     > Sent: Monday, August 21, 2017 11:22 AM
        > > >     > To: dev@nifi.apache.org
        > > >     > Subject: Re: Separate MiNiFi projects in JIRA
        > > >     >
        > > >     > Would  it suffice to make the existing 'component'  field
        > > _required_ at
        > > >     > ticket creation time, and having components consist of 'C++',
        > > 'Java', &
        > > >     > perhaps 'Both/All/*' as well? I imagine that is less effort
than
        > > setting up
        > > >     > and maintaining a separate project and solves the problem,
unless
        > > there are
        > > >     > advantages that a separate project would provide other than
just
        > > issue
        > > >     > filtering by C++/Java.
        > > >     >
        > > >     > Kevin
        > > >     >
        > > >     > On 8/21/17, 11:18, "Andy Christianson" <
        > > achristianson@hortonworks.com>
        > > >     > wrote:
        > > >     >
        > > >     >     Joe,
        > > >     >
        > > >     >     We actually already have that. There is a 'C++' and 'Java'
        > > component.
        > > >     > It works for the most part, but there are cases where it becomes
        > > ambiguous,
        > > >     > particularly on docker-related tickets.
        > > >     >
        > > >     >     I think there's certainly an argument that we need to
just
        > > track
        > > >     > components more carefully. Having it be a separate JIRA would
        > make
        > > it
        > > >     > harder to make a ticket ambiguous. Is it worth the
        > effort/overhead
        > > of
        > > >     > setting up another JIRA? I'll leave that to the more
        > > >     > experienced/established Apache parties since I don't know
what
        > the
        > > overhead
        > > >     > cost is.
        > > >     >
        > > >     >     Regards,
        > > >     >
        > > >     >     Andy I.C.
        > > >     >     ________________________________________
        > > >     >     From: Joe Witt <joe.witt@gmail.com>
        > > >     >     Sent: Monday, August 21, 2017 11:10 AM
        > > >     >     To: dev@nifi.apache.org
        > > >     >     Subject: Re: Separate MiNiFi projects in JIRA
        > > >     >
        > > >     >     Can we recommend and setup a set of component names so
that
        > > filtering
        > > >     >     can be done reasonably?
        > > >     >
        > > >     >     If we do that would it be sufficient?
        > > >     >
        > > >     >     Alternatively we can ask ASF infra to setup another JIRA
        > > project such
        > > >     >     as 'minificpp' but I'd like to avoid that until we're
really
        > > sure we
        > > >     >     want to bug em.
        > > >     >
        > > >     >     Thanks
        > > >     >
        > > >     >     On Mon, Aug 21, 2017 at 11:03 AM, Andy Christianson
        > > >     >     <achristianson@hortonworks.com> wrote:
        > > >     >     > Agree 100%. I have been bitten by this a few times.
Is this
        > > >     > something Aldrin can do/have done?
        > > >     >     >
        > > >     >     > -Andy I.C.
        > > >     >     > ________________________________________
        > > >     >     > From: Jeff Zemerick <jzemerick@apache.org>
        > > >     >     > Sent: Friday, August 18, 2017 2:56 PM
        > > >     >     > To: dev@nifi.apache.org
        > > >     >     > Subject: Separate MiNiFi projects in JIRA
        > > >     >     >
        > > >     >     > The MINIFI project in JIRA is currently a combination
of
        > > issues for
        > > >     > both
        > > >     >     > the C++ and Java implementations. Some issues for
the C++
        > > project do
        > > >     > have
        > > >     >     > the C++ component set but some don't and it can sometimes
        > be
        > > hard to
        > > >     > easily
        > > >     >     > differentiate the issues by their titles. (There
isn't a
        > > "Java"
        > > >     > component
        > > >     >     > so a useful filter is hard to make.) Has there been
any
        > > >     > consideration given
        > > >     >     > to having separate JIRA projects for the C++/Java
MiNiFi
        > > >     > implementations?
        > > >     >     >
        > > >     >     > Thanks,
        > > >     >     > Jeff
        > > >     >     >
        > > >     >     >
        > > >     >
        > > >     >
        > > >     >
        > > >     >
        > > >     >
        > > >     >
        > > >     >
        > > >     >
        > > >     >
        > > >
        > > >
        > > >
        > >
        >
        
    
    
    

Mime
View raw message