Re: [office] Thoughts on using JIRA for ODF 1.4 and beyond

[Michael Stahl <Michael.Stahl@cib.de>]

hi Patrick,

some thoughts below...

On 02.10.20 21:10, Patrick Durusau wrote:
> Greetings!
>
> As I construct complete change-tracked versions from ODF 1.2 to ODF 1.3,
> I've had a chance to really experience our usage of JIRA. Large chunks
> of it.
>
> Some suggestions/comments as we move forward to ODF 1.4:
>
> Summary Field: Let's not put section numbers, etc., which are likely to
> change. Use <element> name or element@attribute if you need to talk
> about a particular attribute for an element. That will make tracking a
> lot easier.
i agree that summary must contain the element or attribute name, but i 
think it doesn't hurt if in addition to that it contains some section 
number.
> Personally I don't find the fix version versus affects version
> distinction all the helpful. Can we agree to always use just one or the
> other? If we need to target a prior version for correction, let's just
> create a new issue and list it as affects that version, for example. I
> think if we regularize that practice, that will help as well in terms of
> not missing anything.

we need to track some target version somewhere, so we are able to 
distinguish important issues that should go into the next ODF version 
from "wishlist" issues that have a lower priority.

in the past we have used "Fix Version" field for this purpose, and this 
has the convenient consequence that this field now contains useful data 
in most issues (except those in state NEW).

i think that "Affects version" is bit less useful, it's useful for 
defects in the specification, but i don't see the point of it for new 
features.... but when it *is* useful, it will naturally have a different 
value from the "Fix Version" as described previously.

i agree that if we want to target a fix of some defect for multiple ODF 
versions, e.g. for errata, we should clone the issue and assign 
different "Fix Version" to each, so that we can track the progress per 
version.

> Make every JIRA issue an issue for one numbered section only. If the
> problem is spread across several sections, let's create several JIRA
> issues for it. Not one JIRA issue that spans several sections.

i don't necessarily agree with this; in some cases the same problem 
needs to be fixed in multiple places, and if there are multiple issues 
it means it's easier to apply some of the issue resolutions but not 
others, and it also makes it harder to coordinate writing N proposals 
that are consistent with each other.

> More to the editors than anyone but pointing to email comments imposing
> another step of indirection in working on the issue. Each distinct issue
> should have a separate JIRA issue and be confined to the *description*
> section.

i don't have an opinion on this, but note that JIRA's rich text 
formatting could mangle the email formatting.

we can try it and see how it works, maybe add {noformat} tags around the 
pasted text...

> The proposal section remains *blank* until the TC agrees on a resolution
> and that resolution is recorded in the proposal field, along with the
> date the TC agreed upon the solution.

agree, except that we should use the *resolution* field for this, not 
the *proposal* field.

my preferred way would be to edit the proposal field until there is a 
rough consensus, then vote on the issue, then write into the resolution 
field "resolved as proposed" with a link to the meeting minutes.

> Any significant opposition to this process going forward for ODF 1.4? (I
> persist in thinking software tracking systems are ill-adapted to
> standards work but it's the tool we have at the moment.)

good to hear your ideas about workflow improvements; agree that JIRA has 
a few pesky issues here...

> Hope everyone is at the start of a great weekend!
>
> Patrick

regards,

Âmichael

--
Michael Stahl
Senior Software-Entwickler LibreOffice
âââ
CIB software GmbH
GeschÃftsstelle Hamburg
Flachsland 10
22083 Hamburg
âââ
T +49 (40) / 28 48 42 -296
F +49 (40) / 28 48 42 -100
Michael.Stahl@cib.de
www.cib.de
âââ
Sitz: MÃnchen
Registergericht MÃnchen, HRB 123286
GeschÃftsfÃhrer: Dipl.-Ing. Ulrich Brandner