You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@hbase.apache.org by Josh Elser <el...@apache.org> on 2019/05/13 19:34:45 UTC
[DISCUSS] Updating categorical info on Jira
I see BijuN doing a lot of work lately to try to categorize issues
better. Thanks to him for trying to make Jira more usable in that regard!
One concern I have is that we have duplicative categorization:
components and labels. I prefer components as they push us into curated
"names" whereas a label might have skew in capitalization (e.g. "quota",
"Quota", "quotas", "space quota").
What do others think?
Re: [DISCUSS] Updating categorical info on Jira
Posted by Biju N <bi...@gmail.com>.
Thank you. Will use them.
On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 2:07 PM Josh Elser <el...@apache.org> wrote:
> Sorry, not "hbase-filesystem" but "Filesystem Integration"
>
> On 5/16/19 2:04 PM, Josh Elser wrote:
> > Thanks, Biju.
> >
> > I've created "Quotas" and "Scheduler" components. There is also an
> > "hbase-filesystem" component which can be used for the HBOSS project
> > (saw you added a label for that this morning).
> >
> > We'll probably have to beg, but hopefully folks can self-police and use
> > components a bit more rigorously :)
> >
> > On 5/16/19 11:07 AM, Biju N wrote:
> >> Hi Josh,
> >> JIRA items related to "quota" is the one which I was going through
> >> recently which was not in the component list. It would help if all
> >> supported quota features gets added to the component list.
> >> The next one which is good to add is "scheduler". To give some
> >> context
> >> why this will help here is the one of the key scheduler related tickets
> >> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-11355. With having a
> >> component
> >> "scheduler" it will help any one to quickly filter on them to understand
> >> what was done/implemented and the reasoning which may not be available
> in
> >> the code. Currently it takes some time for users who are not familiar
> >> with
> >> the code base.
> >>
> >> I am sure there are others which need to be added. One request to the
> >> "dev"
> >> team. Before a change is committed, if we can make sure that a
> >> "component"
> >> is assigned to the ticket (some tickets may not need it), JIRA can be a
> >> quick source of documentation. Hope we can update the old tickets as and
> >> when someone goes through with the proper component it belongs to.
> >>
> >> On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 9:36 AM Josh Elser <el...@apache.org> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Biju -- we have the ability to define components.
> >>>
> >>> It sounds like the consensus is that folks prefer components over
> >>> free-form labels.
> >>>
> >>> What are the components that you hoped to find that aren't there?
> >>>
> >>> On 5/13/19 6:31 PM, Biju N wrote:
> >>>> FYI. There are instances where we don't have "components" which can
> >>>> help
> >>>> filter a feature for e.g. Quota is a good example. That is a reason
> for
> >>>> using labels. This helps in filtering the tickets and get an
> >>> understanding
> >>>> of a feature.
> >>>>
> >>>> On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 5:36 PM Andrew Purtell
> >>>> <andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> >>>>
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>> I’ve been using components so am accidentally in agreement. Didn’t
> >>>>> know
> >>>>> which to use, just picked one. We should document this preference.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>> On May 13, 2019, at 12:52 PM, Jan Hentschel <
> >>>>> jan.hentschel@ultratendency.com> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> Agree with Sean. I would prefer to use labels where we have
> >>>>>> something,
> >>>>> which is not HBase-specific (such as the “beginner” label), and
> >>> components
> >>>>> otherwise.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> From: Sean Busbey <se...@gmail.com>
> >>>>>> Reply-To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> >>>>>> Date: Monday, May 13, 2019 at 9:48 PM
> >>>>>> To: dev <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> >>>>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Updating categorical info on Jira
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> labels are shared across the entire jira instance whereas components
> >>>>>> are under the control of the project. personally I prefer
> components.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> the only labels I like are when we use "beginner" or if we were to
> >>>>>> move away from "Hadoop Flags" to an incompatible change label.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 2:34 PM Josh Elser <elserj@apache.org
> <mailto:
> >>>>> elserj@apache.org>> wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> I see BijuN doing a lot of work lately to try to categorize issues
> >>>>>> better. Thanks to him for trying to make Jira more usable in that
> >>> regard!
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> One concern I have is that we have duplicative categorization:
> >>>>>> components and labels. I prefer components as they push us into
> >>>>>> curated
> >>>>>> "names" whereas a label might have skew in capitalization (e.g.
> >>> "quota",
> >>>>>> "Quota", "quotas", "space quota").
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> What do others think?
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>> Sean
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Updating categorical info on Jira
Posted by Josh Elser <el...@apache.org>.
Sorry, not "hbase-filesystem" but "Filesystem Integration"
On 5/16/19 2:04 PM, Josh Elser wrote:
> Thanks, Biju.
>
> I've created "Quotas" and "Scheduler" components. There is also an
> "hbase-filesystem" component which can be used for the HBOSS project
> (saw you added a label for that this morning).
>
> We'll probably have to beg, but hopefully folks can self-police and use
> components a bit more rigorously :)
>
> On 5/16/19 11:07 AM, Biju N wrote:
>> Hi Josh,
>> JIRA items related to "quota" is the one which I was going through
>> recently which was not in the component list. It would help if all
>> supported quota features gets added to the component list.
>> The next one which is good to add is "scheduler". To give some
>> context
>> why this will help here is the one of the key scheduler related tickets
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-11355. With having a
>> component
>> "scheduler" it will help any one to quickly filter on them to understand
>> what was done/implemented and the reasoning which may not be available in
>> the code. Currently it takes some time for users who are not familiar
>> with
>> the code base.
>>
>> I am sure there are others which need to be added. One request to the
>> "dev"
>> team. Before a change is committed, if we can make sure that a
>> "component"
>> is assigned to the ticket (some tickets may not need it), JIRA can be a
>> quick source of documentation. Hope we can update the old tickets as and
>> when someone goes through with the proper component it belongs to.
>>
>> On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 9:36 AM Josh Elser <el...@apache.org> wrote:
>>
>>> Biju -- we have the ability to define components.
>>>
>>> It sounds like the consensus is that folks prefer components over
>>> free-form labels.
>>>
>>> What are the components that you hoped to find that aren't there?
>>>
>>> On 5/13/19 6:31 PM, Biju N wrote:
>>>> FYI. There are instances where we don't have "components" which can
>>>> help
>>>> filter a feature for e.g. Quota is a good example. That is a reason for
>>>> using labels. This helps in filtering the tickets and get an
>>> understanding
>>>> of a feature.
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 5:36 PM Andrew Purtell
>>>> <andrew.purtell@gmail.com
>>>>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I’ve been using components so am accidentally in agreement. Didn’t
>>>>> know
>>>>> which to use, just picked one. We should document this preference.
>>>>>
>>>>>> On May 13, 2019, at 12:52 PM, Jan Hentschel <
>>>>> jan.hentschel@ultratendency.com> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Agree with Sean. I would prefer to use labels where we have
>>>>>> something,
>>>>> which is not HBase-specific (such as the “beginner” label), and
>>> components
>>>>> otherwise.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> From: Sean Busbey <se...@gmail.com>
>>>>>> Reply-To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
>>>>>> Date: Monday, May 13, 2019 at 9:48 PM
>>>>>> To: dev <de...@hbase.apache.org>
>>>>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Updating categorical info on Jira
>>>>>>
>>>>>> labels are shared across the entire jira instance whereas components
>>>>>> are under the control of the project. personally I prefer components.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> the only labels I like are when we use "beginner" or if we were to
>>>>>> move away from "Hadoop Flags" to an incompatible change label.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 2:34 PM Josh Elser <elserj@apache.org<mailto:
>>>>> elserj@apache.org>> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I see BijuN doing a lot of work lately to try to categorize issues
>>>>>> better. Thanks to him for trying to make Jira more usable in that
>>> regard!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> One concern I have is that we have duplicative categorization:
>>>>>> components and labels. I prefer components as they push us into
>>>>>> curated
>>>>>> "names" whereas a label might have skew in capitalization (e.g.
>>> "quota",
>>>>>> "Quota", "quotas", "space quota").
>>>>>>
>>>>>> What do others think?
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>>> Sean
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
Re: [DISCUSS] Updating categorical info on Jira
Posted by Josh Elser <el...@apache.org>.
Thanks, Biju.
I've created "Quotas" and "Scheduler" components. There is also an
"hbase-filesystem" component which can be used for the HBOSS project
(saw you added a label for that this morning).
We'll probably have to beg, but hopefully folks can self-police and use
components a bit more rigorously :)
On 5/16/19 11:07 AM, Biju N wrote:
> Hi Josh,
> JIRA items related to "quota" is the one which I was going through
> recently which was not in the component list. It would help if all
> supported quota features gets added to the component list.
> The next one which is good to add is "scheduler". To give some context
> why this will help here is the one of the key scheduler related tickets
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-11355. With having a component
> "scheduler" it will help any one to quickly filter on them to understand
> what was done/implemented and the reasoning which may not be available in
> the code. Currently it takes some time for users who are not familiar with
> the code base.
>
> I am sure there are others which need to be added. One request to the "dev"
> team. Before a change is committed, if we can make sure that a "component"
> is assigned to the ticket (some tickets may not need it), JIRA can be a
> quick source of documentation. Hope we can update the old tickets as and
> when someone goes through with the proper component it belongs to.
>
> On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 9:36 AM Josh Elser <el...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> Biju -- we have the ability to define components.
>>
>> It sounds like the consensus is that folks prefer components over
>> free-form labels.
>>
>> What are the components that you hoped to find that aren't there?
>>
>> On 5/13/19 6:31 PM, Biju N wrote:
>>> FYI. There are instances where we don't have "components" which can help
>>> filter a feature for e.g. Quota is a good example. That is a reason for
>>> using labels. This helps in filtering the tickets and get an
>> understanding
>>> of a feature.
>>>
>>> On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 5:36 PM Andrew Purtell <andrew.purtell@gmail.com
>>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I’ve been using components so am accidentally in agreement. Didn’t know
>>>> which to use, just picked one. We should document this preference.
>>>>
>>>>> On May 13, 2019, at 12:52 PM, Jan Hentschel <
>>>> jan.hentschel@ultratendency.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Agree with Sean. I would prefer to use labels where we have something,
>>>> which is not HBase-specific (such as the “beginner” label), and
>> components
>>>> otherwise.
>>>>>
>>>>> From: Sean Busbey <se...@gmail.com>
>>>>> Reply-To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
>>>>> Date: Monday, May 13, 2019 at 9:48 PM
>>>>> To: dev <de...@hbase.apache.org>
>>>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Updating categorical info on Jira
>>>>>
>>>>> labels are shared across the entire jira instance whereas components
>>>>> are under the control of the project. personally I prefer components.
>>>>>
>>>>> the only labels I like are when we use "beginner" or if we were to
>>>>> move away from "Hadoop Flags" to an incompatible change label.
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 2:34 PM Josh Elser <elserj@apache.org<mailto:
>>>> elserj@apache.org>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> I see BijuN doing a lot of work lately to try to categorize issues
>>>>> better. Thanks to him for trying to make Jira more usable in that
>> regard!
>>>>>
>>>>> One concern I have is that we have duplicative categorization:
>>>>> components and labels. I prefer components as they push us into curated
>>>>> "names" whereas a label might have skew in capitalization (e.g.
>> "quota",
>>>>> "Quota", "quotas", "space quota").
>>>>>
>>>>> What do others think?
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Sean
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Updating categorical info on Jira
Posted by Biju N <bi...@gmail.com>.
Hi Josh,
JIRA items related to "quota" is the one which I was going through
recently which was not in the component list. It would help if all
supported quota features gets added to the component list.
The next one which is good to add is "scheduler". To give some context
why this will help here is the one of the key scheduler related tickets
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-11355. With having a component
"scheduler" it will help any one to quickly filter on them to understand
what was done/implemented and the reasoning which may not be available in
the code. Currently it takes some time for users who are not familiar with
the code base.
I am sure there are others which need to be added. One request to the "dev"
team. Before a change is committed, if we can make sure that a "component"
is assigned to the ticket (some tickets may not need it), JIRA can be a
quick source of documentation. Hope we can update the old tickets as and
when someone goes through with the proper component it belongs to.
On Thu, May 16, 2019 at 9:36 AM Josh Elser <el...@apache.org> wrote:
> Biju -- we have the ability to define components.
>
> It sounds like the consensus is that folks prefer components over
> free-form labels.
>
> What are the components that you hoped to find that aren't there?
>
> On 5/13/19 6:31 PM, Biju N wrote:
> > FYI. There are instances where we don't have "components" which can help
> > filter a feature for e.g. Quota is a good example. That is a reason for
> > using labels. This helps in filtering the tickets and get an
> understanding
> > of a feature.
> >
> > On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 5:36 PM Andrew Purtell <andrew.purtell@gmail.com
> >
> > wrote:
> >
> >> I’ve been using components so am accidentally in agreement. Didn’t know
> >> which to use, just picked one. We should document this preference.
> >>
> >>> On May 13, 2019, at 12:52 PM, Jan Hentschel <
> >> jan.hentschel@ultratendency.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> Agree with Sean. I would prefer to use labels where we have something,
> >> which is not HBase-specific (such as the “beginner” label), and
> components
> >> otherwise.
> >>>
> >>> From: Sean Busbey <se...@gmail.com>
> >>> Reply-To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> >>> Date: Monday, May 13, 2019 at 9:48 PM
> >>> To: dev <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> >>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Updating categorical info on Jira
> >>>
> >>> labels are shared across the entire jira instance whereas components
> >>> are under the control of the project. personally I prefer components.
> >>>
> >>> the only labels I like are when we use "beginner" or if we were to
> >>> move away from "Hadoop Flags" to an incompatible change label.
> >>>
> >>> On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 2:34 PM Josh Elser <elserj@apache.org<mailto:
> >> elserj@apache.org>> wrote:
> >>>
> >>> I see BijuN doing a lot of work lately to try to categorize issues
> >>> better. Thanks to him for trying to make Jira more usable in that
> regard!
> >>>
> >>> One concern I have is that we have duplicative categorization:
> >>> components and labels. I prefer components as they push us into curated
> >>> "names" whereas a label might have skew in capitalization (e.g.
> "quota",
> >>> "Quota", "quotas", "space quota").
> >>>
> >>> What do others think?
> >>>
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Sean
> >>>
> >>
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Updating categorical info on Jira
Posted by Josh Elser <el...@apache.org>.
Biju -- we have the ability to define components.
It sounds like the consensus is that folks prefer components over
free-form labels.
What are the components that you hoped to find that aren't there?
On 5/13/19 6:31 PM, Biju N wrote:
> FYI. There are instances where we don't have "components" which can help
> filter a feature for e.g. Quota is a good example. That is a reason for
> using labels. This helps in filtering the tickets and get an understanding
> of a feature.
>
> On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 5:36 PM Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> I’ve been using components so am accidentally in agreement. Didn’t know
>> which to use, just picked one. We should document this preference.
>>
>>> On May 13, 2019, at 12:52 PM, Jan Hentschel <
>> jan.hentschel@ultratendency.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Agree with Sean. I would prefer to use labels where we have something,
>> which is not HBase-specific (such as the “beginner” label), and components
>> otherwise.
>>>
>>> From: Sean Busbey <se...@gmail.com>
>>> Reply-To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
>>> Date: Monday, May 13, 2019 at 9:48 PM
>>> To: dev <de...@hbase.apache.org>
>>> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Updating categorical info on Jira
>>>
>>> labels are shared across the entire jira instance whereas components
>>> are under the control of the project. personally I prefer components.
>>>
>>> the only labels I like are when we use "beginner" or if we were to
>>> move away from "Hadoop Flags" to an incompatible change label.
>>>
>>> On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 2:34 PM Josh Elser <elserj@apache.org<mailto:
>> elserj@apache.org>> wrote:
>>>
>>> I see BijuN doing a lot of work lately to try to categorize issues
>>> better. Thanks to him for trying to make Jira more usable in that regard!
>>>
>>> One concern I have is that we have duplicative categorization:
>>> components and labels. I prefer components as they push us into curated
>>> "names" whereas a label might have skew in capitalization (e.g. "quota",
>>> "Quota", "quotas", "space quota").
>>>
>>> What do others think?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Sean
>>>
>>
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Updating categorical info on Jira
Posted by Biju N <bi...@gmail.com>.
FYI. There are instances where we don't have "components" which can help
filter a feature for e.g. Quota is a good example. That is a reason for
using labels. This helps in filtering the tickets and get an understanding
of a feature.
On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 5:36 PM Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com>
wrote:
> I’ve been using components so am accidentally in agreement. Didn’t know
> which to use, just picked one. We should document this preference.
>
> > On May 13, 2019, at 12:52 PM, Jan Hentschel <
> jan.hentschel@ultratendency.com> wrote:
> >
> > Agree with Sean. I would prefer to use labels where we have something,
> which is not HBase-specific (such as the “beginner” label), and components
> otherwise.
> >
> > From: Sean Busbey <se...@gmail.com>
> > Reply-To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> > Date: Monday, May 13, 2019 at 9:48 PM
> > To: dev <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> > Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Updating categorical info on Jira
> >
> > labels are shared across the entire jira instance whereas components
> > are under the control of the project. personally I prefer components.
> >
> > the only labels I like are when we use "beginner" or if we were to
> > move away from "Hadoop Flags" to an incompatible change label.
> >
> > On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 2:34 PM Josh Elser <elserj@apache.org<mailto:
> elserj@apache.org>> wrote:
> >
> > I see BijuN doing a lot of work lately to try to categorize issues
> > better. Thanks to him for trying to make Jira more usable in that regard!
> >
> > One concern I have is that we have duplicative categorization:
> > components and labels. I prefer components as they push us into curated
> > "names" whereas a label might have skew in capitalization (e.g. "quota",
> > "Quota", "quotas", "space quota").
> >
> > What do others think?
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Sean
> >
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Updating categorical info on Jira
Posted by Andrew Purtell <an...@gmail.com>.
I’ve been using components so am accidentally in agreement. Didn’t know which to use, just picked one. We should document this preference.
> On May 13, 2019, at 12:52 PM, Jan Hentschel <ja...@ultratendency.com> wrote:
>
> Agree with Sean. I would prefer to use labels where we have something, which is not HBase-specific (such as the “beginner” label), and components otherwise.
>
> From: Sean Busbey <se...@gmail.com>
> Reply-To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> Date: Monday, May 13, 2019 at 9:48 PM
> To: dev <de...@hbase.apache.org>
> Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Updating categorical info on Jira
>
> labels are shared across the entire jira instance whereas components
> are under the control of the project. personally I prefer components.
>
> the only labels I like are when we use "beginner" or if we were to
> move away from "Hadoop Flags" to an incompatible change label.
>
> On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 2:34 PM Josh Elser <el...@apache.org>> wrote:
>
> I see BijuN doing a lot of work lately to try to categorize issues
> better. Thanks to him for trying to make Jira more usable in that regard!
>
> One concern I have is that we have duplicative categorization:
> components and labels. I prefer components as they push us into curated
> "names" whereas a label might have skew in capitalization (e.g. "quota",
> "Quota", "quotas", "space quota").
>
> What do others think?
>
>
>
> --
> Sean
>
Re: [DISCUSS] Updating categorical info on Jira
Posted by Jan Hentschel <ja...@ultratendency.com>.
Agree with Sean. I would prefer to use labels where we have something, which is not HBase-specific (such as the “beginner” label), and components otherwise.
From: Sean Busbey <se...@gmail.com>
Reply-To: "dev@hbase.apache.org" <de...@hbase.apache.org>
Date: Monday, May 13, 2019 at 9:48 PM
To: dev <de...@hbase.apache.org>
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] Updating categorical info on Jira
labels are shared across the entire jira instance whereas components
are under the control of the project. personally I prefer components.
the only labels I like are when we use "beginner" or if we were to
move away from "Hadoop Flags" to an incompatible change label.
On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 2:34 PM Josh Elser <el...@apache.org>> wrote:
I see BijuN doing a lot of work lately to try to categorize issues
better. Thanks to him for trying to make Jira more usable in that regard!
One concern I have is that we have duplicative categorization:
components and labels. I prefer components as they push us into curated
"names" whereas a label might have skew in capitalization (e.g. "quota",
"Quota", "quotas", "space quota").
What do others think?
--
Sean
Re: [DISCUSS] Updating categorical info on Jira
Posted by Sean Busbey <se...@gmail.com>.
labels are shared across the entire jira instance whereas components
are under the control of the project. personally I prefer components.
the only labels I like are when we use "beginner" or if we were to
move away from "Hadoop Flags" to an incompatible change label.
On Mon, May 13, 2019 at 2:34 PM Josh Elser <el...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> I see BijuN doing a lot of work lately to try to categorize issues
> better. Thanks to him for trying to make Jira more usable in that regard!
>
> One concern I have is that we have duplicative categorization:
> components and labels. I prefer components as they push us into curated
> "names" whereas a label might have skew in capitalization (e.g. "quota",
> "Quota", "quotas", "space quota").
>
> What do others think?
--
Sean