On Jul 27, 2011, at 5:30 AM, Mark McLoughlin wrote:
Hi Steve,
On Tue, 2011-07-26 at 09:54 -0500, Steve Loranz wrote:
> This is all stuff that should be in the feature description and update
> log *in Redmine*. We're already identifying target releases for
> features and tasks there, we're already tracking progress there, we
> can already see the last time it was updated there, who owns it, etc.
>
> I do think it is good to adapt some of this template to features and
> tasks in Redmine to urge better definition and updates, but I really
> want to keep one definitive place for features and tasks.
That sounds reasonable, so I took a look at how we could move the audrey
example[1] into redmine but I got a bit stuck:
- are you suggesting that we'd file an issue on the Feature tracker
and then file child issues for each remaining tasks on the list?
- I'm not too keen on putting all this stuff in an issue description,
since it wouldn't be editable - a lot of it is high-level
documentation that should be updated as things change during
development. Perhaps the issue should just link to a wiki page?
- this template I put together is for much higher-level features than
I'd expect to see as Redmine Features - e.g. the audrey feature I
wrote up should map to quite a few Redmine features
- Audrey seems to be using Versions as a way of grouping related
issues. I don't think you're suggesting creating a Version to
represent a feature?
- Audrey's Redmine seems to have gone very quiet over the past few
months after an initial flurry of activity. If it's all gone very
stale, it's not the most inviting place to put this stuff
Perhaps the best thing would be for you to blaze the Redmine trail with
Image Factory's features for the next release?
Cheers,
Mark.
[1] -
http://aeolusproject.org/page/Features/AudreyInstanceLaunchConfiguration
_______________________________________________
aeolus-devel mailing list
aeolus-devel(a)lists.fedorahosted.org
https://fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/aeolus-devel
It's true Audrey's Redmine has cone quite, my bad. I'll work to keep it more
current.
Later today I plan to post an Audrey 0.4.0 design document for review to describe Audrey
Conductor Integration along with a method for passing configuration tooling to a launching
instance.
Joe