xmlgraphics-fop-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Pascal Sancho <psancho....@gmail.com>
Subject Re: svn commit: r1360665 - in /xmlgraphics/fop/trunk: ./ src/java/org/apache/fop/layoutmgr/ test/java/org/apache/fop/intermediate/ test/java/org/apache/fop/layoutengine/
Date Fri, 13 Jul 2012 13:30:58 GMT
I'm ok with that, but all fop team should be convinced...
So debate (if that need to discuss) is open ;-)


2012/7/13 Glenn Adams <glenn@skynav.com>:
>
> On Fri, Jul 13, 2012 at 2:05 AM, Pascal Sancho <psancho.asf@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>>
>> IMHO, using a bugtracker system to list bugfix or changes is a good idea.
>> But today, the practice in FOP project is to fill this list directly
>> in the cited page.
>> We can adopt a new policy here and have a change/bugfix list using
>> bugtracker facilities.
>> That could be done when we'll migrate to Jira.
>> IIUC, Bugzilla entries will be migrated to Jira in the future.
>> Waiting this migration, we can today begin to systematically fill a
>> new Bugzilla entry, to keep trace in Jira.
>
>
> Thanks, yes, I agree with this, but I don't think I'm suggesting a new
> policy. We have a policy today of telling the community to report bugs in
> BZ, then we make fixes and close (or reject) those bug reports, where fixes
> change the code base and the bug is closed and a entry made in status.xml.
>
> When we committers make changes that are essentially bug fixes (as opposed
> to minor cleanup), then we should not bypass this existing, accepted
> practice, because doing so creates unnecessary exceptions in our
> documentation and process trail. In other words, let's be consistent, and
> document bugs we fix independently in the same fashion as when those bugs
> are first reported by the community.
>
> I think this is a reasonable process and should not be contravened for the
> sake of expediency.
>
> G.
>
>



-- 
pascal

Mime
View raw message