Jean-Daniel Cryans 2013-05-10, 23:37
Ted Yu 2013-05-10, 23:43
I will log a JIRA with an empty description if it is a subtask and the
title makes it obvious. Then comments with status updates. Those JIRAs are
like a to do list. On the other hand for new features I will write up a
detailed description plus a design document. Is there a difference between
those two situations or do you advocate something different for the former?
That's fine, but if so, then what exactly should I do differently? Maybe
Title: "[Feature] Subtask"
Description: "Implement $subtask"
I try to exercise good judgement. If you can point out specific examples
that should be done differently in your opinion and what should be done
differently, that would be great.
On Saturday, May 11, 2013, Ted Yu wrote:
> I agree with J-D.
> New JIRAs are being logged daily, some with empty description.
> > Guys,
> > Last year I wrote this note to the dev list and got feedback in the
> > likes of: "Big +1", "+1", "Amen!", "JD you're my hero".
> > I feel a refresher is in order.
> > Thanks!
> > J-D
> > ---------- Forwarded message ----------
> > Date: Mon, Mar 26, 2012 at 3:52 PM
> > Subject: Describing your patches, writing release notes
> > Hi devs,
> > Our community has really been growing recently and it's getting harder
> > and harder to keep up with what's going on in the project. I can think
> > of two things that would really help (me at least).
> > 1) Explaining your patches
> > Whether you need to go back to a jira that's been fixed months ago or
> > you're just trying to grok the progression of another, not having any
> > description of what's being done in a particular patch attached to a
> > jira has at least two bad effects: a developer has to either spend
> > time trying to understand the changes or he simply moves on and misses
> > the party bus. It's much more efficient if the author describes what
> > he did.
> > Bad examples of comments coming along patches:
> > "Here's a patch"
> > "v2"
> > "First pass" / "Second pass" / "Final"
> > Unless the required work was already pretty explicit like adding
> > documentation or fixing something small, this is not helping anyone
> > (including the author).
> > Ok examples:
> > "To fix the bug I added X in Y"
> > "In this patch I refactored Foo"
> > This might be enough but if the patch is >50kb then you better come up
> > with something better than that.
> > Good examples would include:
> > - A description of how your patch is trying to solve the issue.
> > - Explanations for certain parts you think are sketchy or tricky. "I
> > tried to do X but because of Y it was impossible, had to hack this
> > instead". "This might look like a big shotgun surgery, but 90% of this
> > patch is just a big refactor because I extracted these methods into a
> > separate class".
> > - An overview of the unit tests you added or had to change and why.
> > If you're zealous, or working on a very big patch, you might want to
> > list the changes per file along with a concise description. Example:
> > 2) Writing release notes
> > Sometimes one or two sentences can prevent having to read a whole jira.
> > When:
> > - You add a new feature, you should describe what needs to be
> > configured in order to enable it .
> > - You add a new configuration, you should list it there and give a few
> > tips on using it.
> > - You change a behavior, you should explicitly say how it used to work
> > and how it's going to work.
> > - You remove a feature/confg/behavior, you should list it there too.
Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein
(via Tom White)
Enis Söztutar 2013-05-11, 01:33
Andrew Purtell 2013-05-11, 01:45
Jean-Daniel Cryans 2013-05-11, 19:35