[almighty] Names and Definitions

[Max Rydahl Andersen]

On 26 Sep 2016, at 21:54, Andrew Lee Rubinger wrote:

> On Mon, Sep 26, 2016 at 3:51 PM, Max Rydahl Andersen 
> <manderse at redhat.com>
> wrote:
>
>> P.S. I noticed your reference to bug tracking - will this be an 
>> external
>> system (bugzilla, JIRA, git, etc.) or something that we will build 
>> in?
>>
>> Yes. :P
>> It's our own view of the issue-tracking world, so it's internal.
>> Additionally we will be using other systems as extensible backends 
>> and
>> data
>> providers.
>>
>> to be clear - almighty notion of remote issues is explicitly kept 
>> simple
>> so we do *not* need to treat them as backends, but mainly data 
>> providers.
>>
> Let's wait for Aslak on that.  I'm not sold. :)
>
> Example use case: writing/editing an issue.  Done internally and would 
> need
> to be propagated back.  I view this as "under review" not a conclusion 
> yet.

creating a basic issue in the remote system - sure.
updating basic status and description - sure.

creating and editing full blown issues as complete as jira  or bugzilla 
has it ? No.

Again, if you want full two-way sync then you are *not* talking about 
what we have
called remote issues since day one.

The "remote" part is first class concept - it is an issue that is not 
"owned" or managed by almighty directly and we want to include in 
overall plan - it will/can have different comment thread, different 
assignee etc. than the actual issue remotely.

Having a different backend for storing actual issues != having support 
for remote work items.

Lets at least make sure we keep those concepts/concerns separate so we 
are clear on what usecases we are trying to solve.


/max
http://about.me/maxandersen
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/almighty-public/attachments/20160927/6af74aeb/attachment.htm>