Hi,
My preference goes to Option A.
* I had to do some statistics on the issues implemented on Applications
found on e.x.o. It was really easy for me to make those queries on jira and
see my contribution across multiple extensions.
* It's also easier for a developer that has multiple projects on contrib to
manage/view his open issues.
* Also easy to link to issues found on Platform and see that issue status
(closed, etc.)
* Creating an issue on jira and linking it in the commit message is a best
practice that should be used also on contrib
Still I don't think we can force anyone and if they want to have their own
issue tracker or not create issues for their commits it's a pity for them,
since I don't think is that hard of a step (comparing to the benefits it
provides).
Option A should be the 'recommended'/'standard' way of doing things.
Thanks,
Caty
On Tue, Sep 23, 2014 at 4:22 PM, vincent(a)massol.net <vincent(a)massol.net>
wrote:
Hi everyone,
ATM the rule we have for contrib projects is to use JIRA (see
http://contrib.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Main/WebHome#HHostingtools)
I’ve heard that some people have been proposing using other trackers.
So I’d like to poll your opinion on the following alternatives:
Option A: all projects use JIRA
===============================
This is the current option in use.
Pros:
* A single place for people to view and search for issues in the XWiki
Ecosystem
Cons:
* For XWiki admins, creating a new JIRA project takes 5 minutes
Option B: all projects use GitHub issues
========================================
Pros:
* Simple to set up for admins (hosted by GitHub)
* Simple to use (too simple sometimes?)
Cons:
* No single place to search all issues related to XWiki (both JIRA +
GitHub)
* No single place to report JIRA issues
* Tied to the SCM choice. When we stop using Git as our SCM and move to
the next SCM tool we’ll have to import all issues (see
https://marketplace.atlassian.com/plugins/com.atlassian.jira.plugins.jira-i…
)
* Need to implement feature on
extensions.xwiki.org to add a link to the
issue tracker for each extension
Option C: let each project decide
=================================
Pros:
* Simple to set up for admins when project decides on GitHub
Cons:
* No single place to search all issues related to XWiki (both JIRA +
GitHub)
* No single place to report JIRA issues
* Tied to the SCM choice. When we stop using Git as our SCM and move to
the next SCM tool we’ll have to import all issues (see
https://marketplace.atlassian.com/plugins/com.atlassian.jira.plugins.jira-i…
)
* Need to implement feature on
extensions.xwiki.org to add a link to the
issue tracker for each extension
Option D: XWiki Task Manager
============================
http://extensions.xwiki.org/xwiki/bin/view/Extension/Task+Manager+Applicati…
Pros:
* Eat our own dog food.
* Forces us to improve this extension
Cons:
* Pressure to fix bugs
* Increases volume of data on
xwiki.org and thus impact performances
* Maintenance cost: More work when upgrading
xwiki.org
* No single place to search all issues related to XWiki (both JIRA +
GitHub)
* No single place to report JIRA issues
* Need to implement feature on
extensions.xwiki.org to add a link to the
issue tracker for each extension
WDYT? Other options?
Personally and based on all pros/cons I think the best ATM is really
Option A. And if we really want, it’s possible to improve the cons by doing
a bit of java coding:
https://developer.atlassian.com/display/JIRADEV/Creating+a+Project+Template
Thanks
-Vincent
_______________________________________________
devs mailing list
devs(a)xwiki.org
http://lists.xwiki.org/mailman/listinfo/devs