You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@harmony.apache.org by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@pobox.com> on 2007/02/11 18:39:53 UTC
[general] When to bring a conversation out of JIRA...
So over the last few days, I've been working off and on trying to
debug some classloader stuff using eclipse. it's been a hoot, since
I don't know eclipse very well.
When working w/ DRLVM as the runtime JRE for running and debugging
unit tests, I ran into a few problems with what appeared to be
related to JDPA et al. Gregory pointed me to http://
issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-3047, a JIRA on what appeared
to be related issues.
Now, reading through, I saw at least one thing (having to put the
jdwp shared lib and the transport share lib) that I spent a bit of
time figuring out myself. Reading down the thread, there seemed to be
other interesting things in there.
Now, I'm an advocate of having tech conversations out on the mailing
list, rather than in JIRA, because I believe it's better for a whole
bunch of reasons. I also understand how it's appropriate for some
comments to remain on JIRA if they tend to be narrow and specific.
Should we try to suggest/mandate a practice that when a JIRA comment
thread gets "long", that we make an effort to bring it out? At least
consciously evaluate if there is going to be broader interest (in
this case) or broader experience that could help?
I think we're missing some good opportunities to leverage the
collective abilities of the community as well as expose information
more broadly if we don't examine and address this.
geir
Re: [general] When to bring a conversation out of JIRA...
Posted by "Geir Magnusson Jr." <ge...@pobox.com>.
Right - "when in doubt, bring it out" :)
On Feb 13, 2007, at 2:31 AM, Alexey Petrenko wrote:
> 2007/2/13, Aleksey Ignatenko <al...@gmail.com>:
>> What is going to be "not-obvious conversations"? I see 2 variants:
>> 1. someone found a very interesting moment and wants to share with
>> his
>> knowledge on it
>> 2. someone is stuck with the issue and tries to get help.
> 3. Few guys arguing to achieve a decision acceptable for all of them.
> 4. The patch will probably affect other areas...
> and so on...
>
> SY, Alexey
>
>> On 2/12/07, Alexey Petrenko <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > I agree that we need to bring out of the JIRA all the long or
>> > not-obvious conversations.
>> > And then add a link to this conversation to original JIRA issue.
>> >
>> > SY, Alexey
>> >
>> > 2007/2/11, Geir Magnusson Jr. <ge...@pobox.com>:
>> > > So over the last few days, I've been working off and on trying to
>> > > debug some classloader stuff using eclipse. it's been a hoot,
>> since
>> > > I don't know eclipse very well.
>> > >
>> > > When working w/ DRLVM as the runtime JRE for running and
>> debugging
>> > > unit tests, I ran into a few problems with what appeared to be
>> > > related to JDPA et al. Gregory pointed me to http://
>> > > issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-3047, a JIRA on what
>> appeared
>> > > to be related issues.
>> > >
>> > > Now, reading through, I saw at least one thing (having to put the
>> > > jdwp shared lib and the transport share lib) that I spent a
>> bit of
>> > > time figuring out myself. Reading down the thread, there
>> seemed to be
>> > > other interesting things in there.
>> > >
>> > > Now, I'm an advocate of having tech conversations out on the
>> mailing
>> > > list, rather than in JIRA, because I believe it's better for a
>> whole
>> > > bunch of reasons. I also understand how it's appropriate for
>> some
>> > > comments to remain on JIRA if they tend to be narrow and
>> specific.
>> > >
>> > > Should we try to suggest/mandate a practice that when a JIRA
>> comment
>> > > thread gets "long", that we make an effort to bring it out?
>> At least
>> > > consciously evaluate if there is going to be broader interest (in
>> > > this case) or broader experience that could help?
>> > >
>> > > I think we're missing some good opportunities to leverage the
>> > > collective abilities of the community as well as expose
>> information
>> > > more broadly if we don't examine and address this.
>> > >
>> > > geir
>> > >
>> >
>>
Re: [general] When to bring a conversation out of JIRA...
Posted by Alexey Petrenko <al...@gmail.com>.
2007/2/13, Aleksey Ignatenko <al...@gmail.com>:
> What is going to be "not-obvious conversations"? I see 2 variants:
> 1. someone found a very interesting moment and wants to share with his
> knowledge on it
> 2. someone is stuck with the issue and tries to get help.
3. Few guys arguing to achieve a decision acceptable for all of them.
4. The patch will probably affect other areas...
and so on...
SY, Alexey
> On 2/12/07, Alexey Petrenko <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> > I agree that we need to bring out of the JIRA all the long or
> > not-obvious conversations.
> > And then add a link to this conversation to original JIRA issue.
> >
> > SY, Alexey
> >
> > 2007/2/11, Geir Magnusson Jr. <ge...@pobox.com>:
> > > So over the last few days, I've been working off and on trying to
> > > debug some classloader stuff using eclipse. it's been a hoot, since
> > > I don't know eclipse very well.
> > >
> > > When working w/ DRLVM as the runtime JRE for running and debugging
> > > unit tests, I ran into a few problems with what appeared to be
> > > related to JDPA et al. Gregory pointed me to http://
> > > issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-3047, a JIRA on what appeared
> > > to be related issues.
> > >
> > > Now, reading through, I saw at least one thing (having to put the
> > > jdwp shared lib and the transport share lib) that I spent a bit of
> > > time figuring out myself. Reading down the thread, there seemed to be
> > > other interesting things in there.
> > >
> > > Now, I'm an advocate of having tech conversations out on the mailing
> > > list, rather than in JIRA, because I believe it's better for a whole
> > > bunch of reasons. I also understand how it's appropriate for some
> > > comments to remain on JIRA if they tend to be narrow and specific.
> > >
> > > Should we try to suggest/mandate a practice that when a JIRA comment
> > > thread gets "long", that we make an effort to bring it out? At least
> > > consciously evaluate if there is going to be broader interest (in
> > > this case) or broader experience that could help?
> > >
> > > I think we're missing some good opportunities to leverage the
> > > collective abilities of the community as well as expose information
> > > more broadly if we don't examine and address this.
> > >
> > > geir
> > >
> >
>
Re: [general] When to bring a conversation out of JIRA...
Posted by Aleksey Ignatenko <al...@gmail.com>.
What is going to be "not-obvious conversations"? I see 2 variants:
1. someone found a very interesting moment and wants to share with his
knowledge on it
2. someone is stuck with the issue and tries to get help.
Aleksey.
On 2/12/07, Alexey Petrenko <al...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I agree that we need to bring out of the JIRA all the long or
> not-obvious conversations.
> And then add a link to this conversation to original JIRA issue.
>
> SY, Alexey
>
> 2007/2/11, Geir Magnusson Jr. <ge...@pobox.com>:
> > So over the last few days, I've been working off and on trying to
> > debug some classloader stuff using eclipse. it's been a hoot, since
> > I don't know eclipse very well.
> >
> > When working w/ DRLVM as the runtime JRE for running and debugging
> > unit tests, I ran into a few problems with what appeared to be
> > related to JDPA et al. Gregory pointed me to http://
> > issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-3047, a JIRA on what appeared
> > to be related issues.
> >
> > Now, reading through, I saw at least one thing (having to put the
> > jdwp shared lib and the transport share lib) that I spent a bit of
> > time figuring out myself. Reading down the thread, there seemed to be
> > other interesting things in there.
> >
> > Now, I'm an advocate of having tech conversations out on the mailing
> > list, rather than in JIRA, because I believe it's better for a whole
> > bunch of reasons. I also understand how it's appropriate for some
> > comments to remain on JIRA if they tend to be narrow and specific.
> >
> > Should we try to suggest/mandate a practice that when a JIRA comment
> > thread gets "long", that we make an effort to bring it out? At least
> > consciously evaluate if there is going to be broader interest (in
> > this case) or broader experience that could help?
> >
> > I think we're missing some good opportunities to leverage the
> > collective abilities of the community as well as expose information
> > more broadly if we don't examine and address this.
> >
> > geir
> >
>
Re: [general] When to bring a conversation out of JIRA...
Posted by Alexey Petrenko <al...@gmail.com>.
I agree that we need to bring out of the JIRA all the long or
not-obvious conversations.
And then add a link to this conversation to original JIRA issue.
SY, Alexey
2007/2/11, Geir Magnusson Jr. <ge...@pobox.com>:
> So over the last few days, I've been working off and on trying to
> debug some classloader stuff using eclipse. it's been a hoot, since
> I don't know eclipse very well.
>
> When working w/ DRLVM as the runtime JRE for running and debugging
> unit tests, I ran into a few problems with what appeared to be
> related to JDPA et al. Gregory pointed me to http://
> issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HARMONY-3047, a JIRA on what appeared
> to be related issues.
>
> Now, reading through, I saw at least one thing (having to put the
> jdwp shared lib and the transport share lib) that I spent a bit of
> time figuring out myself. Reading down the thread, there seemed to be
> other interesting things in there.
>
> Now, I'm an advocate of having tech conversations out on the mailing
> list, rather than in JIRA, because I believe it's better for a whole
> bunch of reasons. I also understand how it's appropriate for some
> comments to remain on JIRA if they tend to be narrow and specific.
>
> Should we try to suggest/mandate a practice that when a JIRA comment
> thread gets "long", that we make an effort to bring it out? At least
> consciously evaluate if there is going to be broader interest (in
> this case) or broader experience that could help?
>
> I think we're missing some good opportunities to leverage the
> collective abilities of the community as well as expose information
> more broadly if we don't examine and address this.
>
> geir
>