catchall JIRA issue for really minor changes

[Josh Thompson <jo...@ncsu.edu>]

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Sometimes, we run across a really minor issue while working on a separate 
issue.  Rather than creating a JIRA issue for each of these minor items, what 
do you think about creating a catchall issue for each component/version 
combination (i.e., issue for frontend v2.1, issue for backend v2.1, issue for 
frontend v2.2, etc).  Then, when something minor comes up, the subversion 
commit is tagged with the catchall issue number for that version.

This way, the bugs are still tracked, but we don't have to create a separate 
issue for things like a regular expression that should have used a + instead 
of the * that was already being used.

I'd also suggest that the catchall issue not be created for a 
component/version until it is needed.

Thoughts?

Josh
- -- 
- -------------------------------
Josh Thompson
Systems Programmer
Virtual Computing Lab (VCL)
North Carolina State University

Josh_Thompson@ncsu.edu
919-515-5323

my GPG/PGP key can be found at pgp.mit.edu
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQFJw/PWV/LQcNdtPQMRAubVAJ4vPIn43V7qep+Gz+L6BCz+p0GJyACdHQER
zG2zN2+uwtoCa7VX7jHu1ws=
=Dpmi
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

Re: catchall JIRA issue for really minor changes

[Matt Hogstrom <ma...@hogstrom.org>]

The process for the community is a community decision.  There is no  
requirement on the Apache side.  I think the right balance will vary  
on project.  I agree with Alan's assessment.

On Mar 27, 2009, at 10:55 AM, Aaron Peeler wrote:

>
> ok thanks. This makes sense.
> Some of us were (I know I was) under the impression
> we needed to tag a jira issue with every commit - no matter how big or
> small the changes. This makes it easier for the small typo changes.
>
> Thanks,
> Aaron
>
> On Thu, 26 Mar 2009, Kevan Miller wrote:
>
>>
>> On Mar 25, 2009, at 11:26 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> That strikes me as a bit of an overkill.  For example, if you see a
>>> variable that can be named a little better or if there's a spelling
>>> error then I don't see the need to file a Jira at all.
>>>
>>> In my opinion Jira is, in addition to a tracking mechanism for
>>> what's going into which release, a communication mechanism for
>>> developers to announce what they feel needs to be done and who
>>> intends to work on it; it's kinda a macroscopic thing.  It is also a
>>> mechanism for the community to officially make its wishes known as
>>> well as the usual bug reporting thing.
>>>
>>> Mentors?  Thoughts?
>>
>> Totally agree.
>>
>> --kevan
>>
>

Re: catchall JIRA issue for really minor changes

[Aaron Peeler <aa...@ncsu.edu>]

ok thanks. This makes sense.
Some of us were (I know I was) under the impression
we needed to tag a jira issue with every commit - no matter how big or
small the changes. This makes it easier for the small typo changes.

Thanks,
Aaron

On Thu, 26 Mar 2009, Kevan Miller wrote:

>
> On Mar 25, 2009, at 11:26 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:
>
> >
> > That strikes me as a bit of an overkill.  For example, if you see a
> > variable that can be named a little better or if there's a spelling
> > error then I don't see the need to file a Jira at all.
> >
> > In my opinion Jira is, in addition to a tracking mechanism for
> > what's going into which release, a communication mechanism for
> > developers to announce what they feel needs to be done and who
> > intends to work on it; it's kinda a macroscopic thing.  It is also a
> > mechanism for the community to officially make its wishes known as
> > well as the usual bug reporting thing.
> >
> > Mentors?  Thoughts?
>
> Totally agree.
>
> --kevan
>

Re: catchall JIRA issue for really minor changes

[Kevan Miller <ke...@gmail.com>]

On Mar 25, 2009, at 11:26 AM, Alan D. Cabrera wrote:

>
> That strikes me as a bit of an overkill.  For example, if you see a  
> variable that can be named a little better or if there's a spelling  
> error then I don't see the need to file a Jira at all.
>
> In my opinion Jira is, in addition to a tracking mechanism for  
> what's going into which release, a communication mechanism for  
> developers to announce what they feel needs to be done and who  
> intends to work on it; it's kinda a macroscopic thing.  It is also a  
> mechanism for the community to officially make its wishes known as  
> well as the usual bug reporting thing.
>
> Mentors?  Thoughts?

Totally agree.

--kevan

Re: catchall JIRA issue for really minor changes

["Alan D. Cabrera" <al...@gmail.com>]

On Mar 20, 2009, at 12:51 PM, Josh Thompson wrote:

> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> Sometimes, we run across a really minor issue while working on a  
> separate
> issue.  Rather than creating a JIRA issue for each of these minor  
> items, what
> do you think about creating a catchall issue for each component/ 
> version
> combination (i.e., issue for frontend v2.1, issue for backend v2.1,  
> issue for
> frontend v2.2, etc).  Then, when something minor comes up, the  
> subversion
> commit is tagged with the catchall issue number for that version.
>
> This way, the bugs are still tracked, but we don't have to create a  
> separate
> issue for things like a regular expression that should have used a +  
> instead
> of the * that was already being used.
>
> I'd also suggest that the catchall issue not be created for a
> component/version until it is needed.
>
> Thoughts?

That strikes me as a bit of an overkill.  For example, if you see a  
variable that can be named a little better or if there's a spelling  
error then I don't see the need to file a Jira at all.

In my opinion Jira is, in addition to a tracking mechanism for what's  
going into which release, a communication mechanism for developers to  
announce what they feel needs to be done and who intends to work on  
it; it's kinda a macroscopic thing.  It is also a mechanism for the  
community to officially make its wishes known as well as the usual bug  
reporting thing.

Mentors?  Thoughts?


Regards,
Alan