RE: [office] Please pardon the JIRA updates

[robert_weir@us.ibm.com]

"Dennis E. Hamilton" <dennis.hamilton@acm.org> wrote on 09/23/2010 
05:20:21 PM:

> 
> RE: [office] Please pardon the JIRA updates
> 
> I for one found it very handy that Public Comment and NEEDS-DISCUSSION 
show
> up in the titles of issues, especially among the torrent of JIRA issue
> notices that end up in my mail folders.
> 

Maybe your email title field is longer than mine.  But I'm maxing out with 
the "Public Comment" and "NEEDS-DISCUSSION" prefix on some of many of the 
titles, so I cannot easily see in my inbox view what the topic of the 
issue actually is, since it is pushed off the the right. 

> Considering that it takes the same permissions to fiddle with the 
component
> as it does to fiddle with the title, I am not sure what we have 
accomplished
> other than making these two cases less visible and no longer having a
> separate spot (presumably) in the various dashboards.
> 

Inventing our own format to encode semantics into the title is not 
scalable.  Use of components is. 

Using components also allows more complicated queries, dashboards, batch 
processing, exports, etc.  For example, suppose you have encoded three 
things via a title tag: A B and C.  How do you search for A and B, knowing 
the order could be arbitrary?  You can't, since we have only a single 
full-text search operator.  But with components you can do that.


> The deed is done and I will stop grousing.  But, having heard no 
complaints
> about how we were doing this, what was broken that was important to fix 
by
> this unilateral and somewhat irreversible move?
> 

For example, I found one issue that had the incorrect spelling 
"NEEDS-DISCUSION" on it.  There may be other variations on that as well. 
That is what is broken out inventing our own syntax when there is already 
idiot-proof support for components.  (Full disclosure, it was my spelling 
error that I uncovered).

> I'm not sure bundling the TC-generated issues made during the Public 
Review
> period is that helpful - are you certain that there needs to be a
> disposition report on those?  [That's the only thing I see that is new 
by
> using that new component and setting it with a batch modification.]
> 

I didn't think so either, at first.  I thought we only needed to report on 
the 23 we received from the public comment list. But than Mary responded 
and said we had to report on member comments received as well, so all 396 
of them. 

Regards,

-Rob

>  - Dennis
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: robert_weir@us.ibm.com [mailto:robert_weir@us.ibm.com] 
> Sent: Thursday, September 23, 2010 12:46
> To: office@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: [office] Please pardon the JIRA updates
> 
> I've made some (hopefully) simplifying changes.
> 
> I created two new JIRA components "public review" and "needs 
discussion". 
> These should be the preferred way of indicating:
> 
> 1) Which comments (public or member) were received during the most 
recent 
> public review period.  I assigned this component for the 396 comments 
> received in the July 8th-Sept 6th review.  Using a component as a tag 
like 
> this will simplify some tasks, such as producing the disposition report. 

> Once the disposition report is published we can remove the component 
> assigment from these issues.
> 
> 2) The Needs Discussion component marks the issues that a member wants 
to 
> bring up on a meeting.  I applied this component to all issues that had 
> "NEEDS-DISCUSSION" in the title. 
> 
> Regards,
> 
> -Rob
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php 
>