Home | About | Sematext search-lucene.com search-hadoop.com
 Search Hadoop and all its subprojects:

Switch to Plain View
Hadoop >> mail # dev >> more information about project split


+
Owen OMalley 2009-06-22, 06:44
+
Raghu Angadi 2009-06-22, 22:19
+
Doug Cutting 2009-06-22, 22:39
+
Amr Awadallah 2009-06-23, 00:36
+
Owen OMalley 2009-06-23, 15:03
+
Raghu Angadi 2009-06-23, 15:50
+
Doug Cutting 2009-06-23, 18:32
+
Amr Awadallah 2009-06-24, 03:39
+
Dhruba Borthakur 2009-06-24, 05:47
Copy link to this message
-
Re: more information about project split
+1 for (4). I agree with Doug that JIRAs are often used for discussion. I
wouldn't mind getting the Hudson reports excluded (wow, what a surprise! -1
for failed tests in contrib), but otherwise, I enjoy how having JIRA send
emails pushes many folks to consolidate discussions on the JIRA instead of
in email.

On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 10:47 PM, Dhruba Borthakur <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> +1 for (4).
>
> This means that the default settings for a hadoop developer is to get
> eveyrthing via email. This allows anyone to set filter settings on his/her
> own email reader to prioritise which types of emails one would like to
> process-in-depth.
>
> -dhruba
>
> On Tue, Jun 23, 2009 at 8:39 PM, Amr Awadallah <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > +1 for (2)  [assuming jira here means a separate mailing list that gets
> the
> > full jira traffic]
> >
> > My main reasoning is: not all issues are relevant to all people, so we
> > should let folks select which issues they want to stay fully updated on
> > (that is why JIRA has the watch functionality). For those who want to
> keep
> > track of every single jira update going on then they can join the full
> > traffic list. I think that is a good compromise between both worlds. My 2
> > cents.
> >
> > -- amr
> >
> >
> > Doug Cutting wrote:
> >
> >> Owen O'Malley wrote:
> >>
> >>> I think the community is better served by having a mailing list that is
> >>> dominated by people posting rather than a deluge of jira traffic.
> >>>
> >>
> >> This is a somewhat false dichotomy: Jira messages are postings by
> people.
> >>  Folks should not make changes in Jira without realizing this. This is
> one
> >> reason why I've long advocated that we should remove the ability for
> folks
> >> to edit Jira comments or for anyone but admins to remove Jira comments.
>  If
> >> we disable emails then this becomes even more essential: folks should
> not be
> >> able to re-write project history.
> >>
> >> Jira actions are project actions, and the Apache convention is that
> >> project actions should be logged on public mailing lists.  We should
> change
> >> that policy cautiously and only after consideration.
> >>
> >>  Choices:
> >>>  1. create/resolve/close to dev
> >>>  2. create/resolve/close to dev, others to jira
> >>>  3. create/comment/resolve/close to dev
> >>>  4. all to dev
> >>>
> >>> The problem with 3 is that you can add comments on most of the actions.
> >>> So either you capture all events or you only capture part of the
> comments.
> >>>
> >>
> >> (4) Send create/resolve to -dev and all others to -issues (a new list)
> >> plus prohibit all comment edits and permit comment deletion only by
> admins.
> >>  (Closing is not generally interesting, since it's only done to seal an
> >> issue once its included in a release.)
> >>
> >> +1 for (4)
> >>
> >> Doug
> >>
> >
>
+
Nigel Daley 2009-06-24, 16:52
+
Steve Loughran 2009-06-25, 13:14
+
Jakob Homan 2009-06-26, 00:25
+
Amr Awadallah 2009-06-26, 17:03
+
Doug Cutting 2009-06-26, 17:20
+
Amr Awadallah 2009-06-26, 17:39
+
Doug Cutting 2009-06-26, 17:49
+
Ted Dunning 2009-06-26, 17:53
+
Amr Awadallah 2009-06-26, 17:59
+
Owen OMalley 2009-06-27, 03:20
+
Philip Zeyliger 2009-07-01, 05:07
+
Ted Dunning 2009-06-26, 17:31
+
Doug Cutting 2009-06-26, 17:45
+
Amr Awadallah 2009-06-24, 16:32
+
Raghu Angadi 2009-06-24, 17:18
+
Doug Cutting 2009-06-24, 17:22
+
Jim Kellerman 2009-06-24, 18:48
+
Hemanth Yamijala 2009-06-25, 04:55
+
Devaraj Das 2009-06-25, 06:38
+
Konstantin Shvachko 2009-06-24, 18:38