You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@thrift.apache.org by Bryan Duxbury <br...@rapleaf.com> on 2010/08/19 20:04:19 UTC

Component names in JIRA

What do you guys think of inverting the current component naming scheme? For
instance, instead of having "Compiler (Java)" and "Library (Java)", we'd
have "Java (Compiler)" and "Java (Library)". I think this would make it
marginally easier to use JIRA.

-Bryan

Re: Component names in JIRA

Posted by Bryan Duxbury <br...@rapleaf.com>.
OK, changes made.

On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 7:56 AM, Aron Sogor <bi...@gmail.com> wrote:

> +1
>
>
>
> On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 7:46 AM, Florentine, Justin F.
> <Ju...@espn.com> wrote:
> > +1
> >
> > On Aug 20, 2010, at 9:09 AM, Igor Ribeiro de Assis wrote:
> >
> >> +1
> >>
> >> On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 11:04 AM, Bryan Duxbury <br...@rapleaf.com>
> wrote:
> >>> What do you guys think of inverting the current component naming
> scheme? For
> >>> instance, instead of having "Compiler (Java)" and "Library (Java)",
> we'd
> >>> have "Java (Compiler)" and "Java (Library)". I think this would make it
> >>> marginally easier to use JIRA.
> >>>
> >>> -Bryan
> >>>
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> --
> >> Igor Ribeiro de Assis
> >>
> >> Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
> >
> >
>

Re: Component names in JIRA

Posted by Aron Sogor <bi...@gmail.com>.
+1



On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 7:46 AM, Florentine, Justin F.
<Ju...@espn.com> wrote:
> +1
>
> On Aug 20, 2010, at 9:09 AM, Igor Ribeiro de Assis wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 11:04 AM, Bryan Duxbury <br...@rapleaf.com> wrote:
>>> What do you guys think of inverting the current component naming scheme? For
>>> instance, instead of having "Compiler (Java)" and "Library (Java)", we'd
>>> have "Java (Compiler)" and "Java (Library)". I think this would make it
>>> marginally easier to use JIRA.
>>>
>>> -Bryan
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Igor Ribeiro de Assis
>>
>> Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.
>
>

Re: Component names in JIRA

Posted by "Florentine, Justin F." <Ju...@espn.com>.
+1

On Aug 20, 2010, at 9:09 AM, Igor Ribeiro de Assis wrote:

> +1
> 
> On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 11:04 AM, Bryan Duxbury <br...@rapleaf.com> wrote:
>> What do you guys think of inverting the current component naming scheme? For
>> instance, instead of having "Compiler (Java)" and "Library (Java)", we'd
>> have "Java (Compiler)" and "Java (Library)". I think this would make it
>> marginally easier to use JIRA.
>> 
>> -Bryan
>> 
> 
> 
> 
> --
> Igor Ribeiro de Assis
> 
> Please consider the environment before printing this e-mail.


Re: Component names in JIRA

Posted by Igor Ribeiro de Assis <ig...@gmail.com>.
+1

On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 11:04 AM, Bryan Duxbury <br...@rapleaf.com> wrote:
> What do you guys think of inverting the current component naming scheme? For
> instance, instead of having "Compiler (Java)" and "Library (Java)", we'd
> have "Java (Compiler)" and "Java (Library)". I think this would make it
> marginally easier to use JIRA.
>
> -Bryan
>



-- 
Igor Ribeiro de Assis

Re: Component names in JIRA

Posted by Prateek Vaishnav <pr...@gmail.com>.
+1
On Fri, Aug 20, 2010 at 10:07 AM, Anthony Molinaro <
anthonym@alumni.caltech.edu> wrote:

> Seems cool to me too.
>
> On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 11:11:44AM -0700, David Reiss wrote:
> > Sure.
> >
> > On 08/19/2010 11:04 AM, Bryan Duxbury wrote:
> > > What do you guys think of inverting the current component naming
> scheme? For
> > > instance, instead of having "Compiler (Java)" and "Library (Java)",
> we'd
> > > have "Java (Compiler)" and "Java (Library)". I think this would make it
> > > marginally easier to use JIRA.
> > >
> > > -Bryan
> > >
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Anthony Molinaro                           <an...@alumni.caltech.edu>
>



-- 
Prateek Vaishnav
Btech IT
5th sem

Re: Component names in JIRA

Posted by Anthony Molinaro <an...@alumni.caltech.edu>.
Seems cool to me too.

On Thu, Aug 19, 2010 at 11:11:44AM -0700, David Reiss wrote:
> Sure.
> 
> On 08/19/2010 11:04 AM, Bryan Duxbury wrote:
> > What do you guys think of inverting the current component naming scheme? For
> > instance, instead of having "Compiler (Java)" and "Library (Java)", we'd
> > have "Java (Compiler)" and "Java (Library)". I think this would make it
> > marginally easier to use JIRA.
> > 
> > -Bryan
> > 

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anthony Molinaro                           <an...@alumni.caltech.edu>

Re: Component names in JIRA

Posted by David Reiss <dr...@facebook.com>.
Sure.

On 08/19/2010 11:04 AM, Bryan Duxbury wrote:
> What do you guys think of inverting the current component naming scheme? For
> instance, instead of having "Compiler (Java)" and "Library (Java)", we'd
> have "Java (Compiler)" and "Java (Library)". I think this would make it
> marginally easier to use JIRA.
> 
> -Bryan
>