On 11/10/06, Marshall Schor <msa@schor.com> wrote:
> What's the trade-off between fine-grain (for example - each plugin is
> it's own component) versus coarser grained (have one thing for all plugins)?
>
> I'm guessing that some good criteria would be:
>
> - obviousness (someone submitting an issue would find it obvious where
> it goes)
> - not too fine grained (otherwise you lose summary info, or list
> becomes too long - not sure about this)
> - each category can have a default initial assignee person
>
> My instincts point me toward wanting fewer categories here. If the list
> gets to big, it's harder to find things.
> <snip/>
I'm OK with that fewer categories. Those seem like good reasons.
> website
> documentation
> uimaj-core
> uimaj-collection-processing
> uimaj-???? (adapters, protocols, transports, ???)
> uimaj-examples
> uimaj-tools <<< other than eclipse
> uimaj-eclipse-plugins
> uimaj-build <<< build, packaging, distribution of uimaj
> legal <<< license, etc. issues
><snip/>
Category names can have spaces and punctuation. So we could have names like:
Website
Documentation
Core Java Framework
Collection Processing
Transport Adapters -- SOAP, Vinci
Examples
Eclipse Plugins
Tools
Build, Packaging
Legal, Licensing
We can rename the components later, so this doesn't have to be perfect.
BTW, I do have administration access after all, I was confused. I
tested that I was able to create a component (the Website component).
-Adam
|