Re: CHANGES.txt vs. JIRA

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CHANGES.txt vs. JIRA

Karl Wettin
Grant Ingersoll skrev:

> I noticed the other day that Hadoop just uses JIRA to publish the
> CHANGES.txt.  Seems a lot easier to me, but wanted to see if anyone
> prefers having a local version that they can edit.
>
> See
> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP?report=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.project:changelog-panel 
>
>
> Versus Lucene Java's form:
>
> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/lucene/java/tags/lucene_2_3_0/CHANGES.txt

Did we de facto choose not choose to use CHANGES.txt? I sort of like
taking a look in there every time I update my Lucene trunk.


     karl
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: CHANGES.txt vs. JIRA

Ted Dunning-3

I think it would be much better for Jira to publish it.  The "how to submit"
page says that it should come in on the patch, but that means the comments
are quadrupplicated (once in Changes.txt in the patch, once on the patch,
once on Jira with the patch and once on the SVN check-in).  Surely
duplicated is enough (on Jira when uploading the patch and once on SVN when
the patch is committed).


On 4/1/08 3:37 PM, "Karl Wettin" <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Grant Ingersoll skrev:
>> I noticed the other day that Hadoop just uses JIRA to publish the
>> CHANGES.txt.  Seems a lot easier to me, but wanted to see if anyone
>> prefers having a local version that they can edit.
>>
>> See
>> http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HADOOP?report=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.
>> system.project:changelog-panel
>>
>>
>> Versus Lucene Java's form:
>>
>> http://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/lucene/java/tags/lucene_2_3_0/CHANGES.txt
>
> Did we de facto choose not choose to use CHANGES.txt? I sort of like
> taking a look in there every time I update my Lucene trunk.
>
>
>      karl