You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@ofbiz.apache.org by Mathieu Lirzin <ma...@nereide.fr> on 2019/09/30 10:50:00 UTC
Re: Adding a CONTRIBUTING.adoc file to the “ofbiz-framework” repository
Hello Pierre,
Pierre Smits <pi...@apache.org> writes:
> I am at a loss here, are you suggesting to introduce new ticket types,
> and/or sub types?
My intent was not to propose a change besides documenting things in a
“CONTRIBUTING.adoc” file instead of in Confluence. I was trying to make
more explicit the relation between the “Jira ticket types” and “commit
prefixes” as there are currently documented [1][2] and used in practice.
Here are the two lists:
- Commit prefixes := Implemented|Improved|Fixed|Completed|Documented|Reverted
- Jira ticket type := Improvement|Bug|New feature|Test|Wish|Task
It is possible that I misinterpreted the current documentation or took
inspiration from “mistakes” made by me or others. So the rules I stated
in my previous mail may not reflect what we are supposed to do.
> As far as JIRA shows there are only:
>
> 1. bug (which can get to final successful resolution 'fixed')
> 2. improvement (which can get to final successful resolution
> 'implemented')
> 3. new feature (which also can get to final successful resolution
> 'implemented')
> 4. task (which can get to final successful resolution 'done')
> 5. test (which can get to a final successful resolution 'executed')
> 6. wish (....)
>
> Refactoring is not a recognised type, and IMO it should not be in. We
> should keep things as simple as possible.
>
> Doesn't the proposed change for bug tickets (being able to classify it as
> 'improved' confuse many? Or am I missing the point?
I agree that our commit guidelines are complex for reasons or benefits
that are not obvious to me, but that's another topic since I didn't
proposed to change them. :-)
I hope this message will help you understand the intent of my previous
one.
Thanks.
[1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/OFBiz+commit+message+template
[2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/OFBiz+Committers+Roles+and+Responsibilities
--
Mathieu Lirzin
GPG: F2A3 8D7E EB2B 6640 5761 070D 0ADE E100 9460 4D37
Re: Adding a CONTRIBUTING.adoc file to the “ofbiz-framework” repository
Posted by Mathieu Lirzin <ma...@nereide.fr>.
Hello Jacques,
Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com> writes:
> As Scott once said all could be resolved to improvement (I could not
> find the reference but I clearly remember it)
It depends if you believe in progress or not. :-)
If not, every ticket/patch could be seen as “evolution” without taking
side regarding if it improves or decays the current version.
> BTW, if you have time and want some "entertainment" you might read
> https://markmail.org/message/pgcf6zfqf6xkfmii
>
> Not really helping :)
Having more context on a subject is always helpful.
Thanks.
--
Mathieu Lirzin
GPG: F2A3 8D7E EB2B 6640 5761 070D 0ADE E100 9460 4D37
Re: Adding a CONTRIBUTING.adoc file to the “ofbiz-framework” repository
Posted by Jacques Le Roux <ja...@les7arts.com>.
Hi Mathieu, Pierre,
As Scott once said all could be resolved to improvement (I could not find the reference but I clearly remember it)
BTW, if you have time and want some "entertainment" you might read https://markmail.org/message/pgcf6zfqf6xkfmii
Not really helping :)
Jacques
Le 30/09/2019 à 12:50, Mathieu Lirzin a écrit :
> Hello Pierre,
>
> Pierre Smits <pi...@apache.org> writes:
>
>> I am at a loss here, are you suggesting to introduce new ticket types,
>> and/or sub types?
> My intent was not to propose a change besides documenting things in a
> “CONTRIBUTING.adoc” file instead of in Confluence. I was trying to make
> more explicit the relation between the “Jira ticket types” and “commit
> prefixes” as there are currently documented [1][2] and used in practice.
> Here are the two lists:
>
> - Commit prefixes := Implemented|Improved|Fixed|Completed|Documented|Reverted
> - Jira ticket type := Improvement|Bug|New feature|Test|Wish|Task
>
> It is possible that I misinterpreted the current documentation or took
> inspiration from “mistakes” made by me or others. So the rules I stated
> in my previous mail may not reflect what we are supposed to do.
>
>> As far as JIRA shows there are only:
>>
>> 1. bug (which can get to final successful resolution 'fixed')
>> 2. improvement (which can get to final successful resolution
>> 'implemented')
>> 3. new feature (which also can get to final successful resolution
>> 'implemented')
>> 4. task (which can get to final successful resolution 'done')
>> 5. test (which can get to a final successful resolution 'executed')
>> 6. wish (....)
>>
>> Refactoring is not a recognised type, and IMO it should not be in. We
>> should keep things as simple as possible.
>>
>> Doesn't the proposed change for bug tickets (being able to classify it as
>> 'improved' confuse many? Or am I missing the point?
> I agree that our commit guidelines are complex for reasons or benefits
> that are not obvious to me, but that's another topic since I didn't
> proposed to change them. :-)
>
> I hope this message will help you understand the intent of my previous
> one.
>
> Thanks.
>
> [1] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/OFBiz+commit+message+template
> [2] https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/OFBiz+Committers+Roles+and+Responsibilities
>