On Sun, Mar 22, 2009 at 1:28 AM, Aristedes Maniatis <ar..sh.com.au> wrote:
>
> On 22/03/2009, at 9:39 AM, Henri Yandell wrote:
>
>> On Sat, Mar 21, 2009 at 3:11 PM, Aristedes Maniatis <ar..sh.com.au>
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> * can we get back our header logo and styling? I'm happy to do it, if it
>>> can
>>> be customised per project and I can be given appropriate access.
>>
>> Nope (I know, I liked the Cayenne l&f too).
>
> OK. Maybe Atlassian will implement this one day in Jira. If you agree,
> please vote for the issue I found:
>
> http://jira.atlassian.com/browse/JRA-11133
Voted, it would be nice to have that.
> Personally I dislike the way the Apache Foundation is so lax with branding.
> Although the feather is mostly standardised, the text "The Apache Software
> Foundation" is presented in a different font and layout everywhere it
> appears.
>
> And at the top of the Jira page along the with URL which presumably
> you know since you are using a web browser to get there. Anyhow, a
> conversation for another list...
That's the image that used to be on www.apache.org until they
redesigned last year.
> Maybe you could change the purple-red header colour to match one of the reds
> from the feather?
It's one of the purples from the feather I think :) All very arbitrary.
>>> * If we want to customise our workflow or permissions do we ask you to
>>> set
>>> up these? I see that permissions are set to "standard permissions" but I
>>> don't really know what that means. I assume any user can create tasks and
>>> comment on tasks, but only committers, etc can change the milestone or
>>> status?
>>
>> Generally we'd like to not see customization. You'll need to explain
>> why Cayenne is special compared to other projects, but there are fair
>> reasons to want specialness. For permissions, you use the project role
>> concept to manage your project rather than the jira groups.
>
>
> OK. I assume it is useful to be able to report across projects to have their
> workflows and statuses match. However we now have a lot of rubbish in our
> issue types:
Mostly it's that having huge amounts of customization makes it harder
to manage. The more custom it gets the harder an upgrade to JIRA 3.14
will be, or dealing with some issue is.
> We are likely to get people picking inappropriate tasks types. Surely "new
> Jira project" should be restricted to the Infrastructure project or
> something? And we don't want to encourage questions in our Jira since we use
> the mailing list for help. I don't even know what RTC means. Ideally, we
> only have "bugs" and "new features".
Agreed. JIRA has global issue types... you can have projects choosing
their own, but for some insanely dumb reason those specific ones also
get added to the global list. Here's somewhere for you to vote :)
http://jira.atlassian.com/browse/JRA-11222
> I notice that some of our SVN commits are doubled up, but that might have
> been that way from before the migration:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CAY-1167?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.ext.subversion%3Asubversion-commits-tabpanel
Interesting. I'll start the old Cayenne instance at some point and
have a look. Presumably a bug in the svn plugin.
> * Should the repository at the left point to Cayenne?
Nope. It's the top most level at which a JIRA is looking; so while it
was Cayenne specific it looked at the Cayenne level, but the main ASF
one looks at all of the ASF svn.
> * Can the commit revision number point to:
> http://fisheye6.atlassian.com/changelog/cayenne/?cs=733975\instead? Fisheye
> is so much more useful than the bare bones viewcvs.
Isn't that what the fisheye tab is for?
Hen
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0.0 : Mon Mar 23 2009 - 12:27:05 EDT