Attempt to normalize patches files names

[Jacques Le Roux]

After a short discussion at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-2445 and following Ashish's last comment I 'd like to
suggest a new contributor best practice for naming patches in Jira issue.
The name would be featureDescription_OFBIZ-number.patch where featureDescription  would be "full Jira issue title if its small" and
"part of title if its big" along with the OFBIZ-number as suffix.
Other suggestions may be found in the Jira issue above. It seems that this should help commiters in their work...

WDYT ?

Jacques

[Ashish Vijaywargiya-5]

+1

Thanks Jacques for bringing this so quick in front of community member :-)

--
Ashish

Jacques Le Roux wrote:

> After a short discussion at
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-2445 and following
> Ashish's last comment I 'd like to suggest a new contributor best
> practice for naming patches in Jira issue.
> The name would be featureDescription_OFBIZ-number.patch where
> featureDescription  would be "full Jira issue title if its small" and
> "part of title if its big" along with the OFBIZ-number as suffix.
> Other suggestions may be found in the Jira issue above. It seems that
> this should help commiters in their work...
>
> WDYT ?
>
> Jacques
>
>

[Jacques Le Roux]

You are welcome Ashish, I have a feeling that this was the easier part ;)

Jacques

From: "Ashish Vijaywargiya" <[hidden email]>

> +1
>
> Thanks Jacques for bringing this so quick in front of community member :-)
>
> --
> Ashish
>
> Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>> After a short discussion at
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-2445 and following
>> Ashish's last comment I 'd like to suggest a new contributor best
>> practice for naming patches in Jira issue.
>> The name would be featureDescription_OFBIZ-number.patch where
>> featureDescription  would be "full Jira issue title if its small" and
>> "part of title if its big" along with the OFBIZ-number as suffix.
>> Other suggestions may be found in the Jira issue above. It seems that
>> this should help commiters in their work...
>>
>> WDYT ?
>>
>> Jacques
>>
>>
>

[BJ Freeman]

I can see putting the jira number (ofbiz-####) in the patch name.
since you have that what is the reason for putting in the description?
what if some cases, there are multiple patches?
(ofbiz-####_##)

Jacques Le Roux sent the following on 5/13/2009 6:36 AM:

> After a short discussion at
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-2445 and following Ashish's
> last comment I 'd like to suggest a new contributor best practice for
> naming patches in Jira issue.
> The name would be featureDescription_OFBIZ-number.patch where
> featureDescription  would be "full Jira issue title if its small" and
> "part of title if its big" along with the OFBIZ-number as suffix.
> Other suggestions may be found in the Jira issue above. It seems that
> this should help commiters in their work...
>
> WDYT ?
>
> Jacques
>
>
>

--
BJ Freeman
http://www.businessesnetwork.com/automation
http://bjfreeman.elance.com
http://www.linkedin.com/profile?viewProfile=&key=1237480&locale=en_US&trk=tab_pro
Systems Integrator.

[Ray-91]

+1

Consistency is good and if it makes it easier to work with then it
should be encouraged.

I would suggest to use the OFBIZ number first:
   OFBIZ-number_featureDescription.patch
This would generally sort/group the files to 1 area which for list views
in file explorers can be handy.

Ray

Jacques Le Roux wrote:

> After a short discussion at
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-2445 and following Ashish's
> last comment I 'd like to suggest a new contributor best practice for
> naming patches in Jira issue.
> The name would be featureDescription_OFBIZ-number.patch where
> featureDescription  would be "full Jira issue title if its small" and
> "part of title if its big" along with the OFBIZ-number as suffix.
> Other suggestions may be found in the Jira issue above. It seems that
> this should help commiters in their work...
>
> WDYT ?
>
> Jacques
>
>
>

[Scott Gray-2]

I think it's fine as a suggestion, but it may be worth keeping in mind  
that every additional requirement we place on contributors could see  
the number of contributions reduced.  The contributors best practice  
page is already quite long and the longer it gets the less likely  
people are to read the whole thing or to read the important parts as  
thoroughly as they might have.  I don't mind either way but it's worth  
keeping in mind.

Personally I never even download patches, I just open them in the  
browser, copy the text and then use apply patch from clipboard in  
eclipse.  It means I'm always guaranteed to be using the latest patch  
and I don't end up a mess of patches on my machine.

Regards
Scott

On 20/05/2009, at 9:59 PM, Ray wrote:

> +1
>
> Consistency is good and if it makes it easier to work with then it  
> should be encouraged.
>
> I would suggest to use the OFBIZ number first:
>  OFBIZ-number_featureDescription.patch
> This would generally sort/group the files to 1 area which for list  
> views in file explorers can be handy.
>
> Ray
>
> Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>> After a short discussion at https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-2445 
>>  and following Ashish's last comment I 'd like to suggest a new  
>> contributor best practice for naming patches in Jira issue.
>> The name would be featureDescription_OFBIZ-number.patch where  
>> featureDescription  would be "full Jira issue title if its small"  
>> and "part of title if its big" along with the OFBIZ-number as suffix.
>> Other suggestions may be found in the Jira issue above. It seems  
>> that this should help commiters in their work...
>> WDYT ?
>> Jacques

[Ashish Vijaywargiya]

>>but it may be worth keeping in mind that every additional requirement we
place on contributors could see the number of contributions reduced.

I don't think that it will or can reduce the contributions. Even if the
developer is smart enough and passionate to do good work then he / she will
encourage the use of most of the best practice IMO.

Keeping best practice at common place doesn't mean that we should take your
contribution only if it is abide by all the points specified on the best
practice page.

Consider other side like if developer don't follow the best practice
although we are here to accept the patch and do so.
So defining things at common place (i.e Best Practices) attracts the
targeted audience IMO.

--
Ashish

On Wed, May 20, 2009 at 6:17 PM, Scott Gray <[hidden email]>wrote:

> I think it's fine as a suggestion, but it may be worth keeping in mind that
> every additional requirement we place on contributors could see the number
> of contributions reduced.  The contributors best practice page is already
> quite long and the longer it gets the less likely people are to read the
> whole thing or to read the important parts as thoroughly as they might have.
>  I don't mind either way but it's worth keeping in mind.
>
> Personally I never even download patches, I just open them in the browser,
> copy the text and then use apply patch from clipboard in eclipse.  It means
> I'm always guaranteed to be using the latest patch and I don't end up a mess
> of patches on my machine.
>
> Regards
> Scott
>
>
>

[Adrian Crum]

I agree with Scott.

I keep a patch folder that I download patches into. When I'm done with
them I delete them.

If someone wanted to evaluate the patch, they could rename it on their
machine - using whatever naming format makes sense to them.

Personally, I won't push too hard for this best practice.

-Adrian

Scott Gray wrote:

> I think it's fine as a suggestion, but it may be worth keeping in mind
> that every additional requirement we place on contributors could see the
> number of contributions reduced.  The contributors best practice page is
> already quite long and the longer it gets the less likely people are to
> read the whole thing or to read the important parts as thoroughly as
> they might have.  I don't mind either way but it's worth keeping in mind.
>
> Personally I never even download patches, I just open them in the
> browser, copy the text and then use apply patch from clipboard in
> eclipse.  It means I'm always guaranteed to be using the latest patch
> and I don't end up a mess of patches on my machine.
>
> Regards
> Scott
>
> On 20/05/2009, at 9:59 PM, Ray wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> Consistency is good and if it makes it easier to work with then it
>> should be encouraged.
>>
>> I would suggest to use the OFBIZ number first:
>>  OFBIZ-number_featureDescription.patch
>> This would generally sort/group the files to 1 area which for list
>> views in file explorers can be handy.
>>
>> Ray
>>
>> Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>>> After a short discussion at
>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-2445 and following
>>> Ashish's last comment I 'd like to suggest a new contributor best
>>> practice for naming patches in Jira issue.
>>> The name would be featureDescription_OFBIZ-number.patch where
>>> featureDescription  would be "full Jira issue title if its small" and
>>> "part of title if its big" along with the OFBIZ-number as suffix.
>>> Other suggestions may be found in the Jira issue above. It seems that
>>> this should help commiters in their work...
>>> WDYT ?
>>> Jacques
>

[Jacques Le Roux]

Done following Ray's suggestion http://docs.ofbiz.org/x/r

Jacques

From: "Ray" <[hidden email]>

> +1
>
> Consistency is good and if it makes it easier to work with then it
> should be encouraged.
>
> I would suggest to use the OFBIZ number first:
>   OFBIZ-number_featureDescription.patch
> This would generally sort/group the files to 1 area which for list views
> in file explorers can be handy.
>
> Ray
>
> Jacques Le Roux wrote:
>> After a short discussion at
>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/OFBIZ-2445 and following Ashish's
>> last comment I 'd like to suggest a new contributor best practice for
>> naming patches in Jira issue.
>> The name would be featureDescription_OFBIZ-number.patch where
>> featureDescription  would be "full Jira issue title if its small" and
>> "part of title if its big" along with the OFBIZ-number as suffix.
>> Other suggestions may be found in the Jira issue above. It seems that
>> this should help commiters in their work...
>>
>> WDYT ?
>>
>> Jacques
>>
>>
>>
>

[Ashish Vijaywargiya]

Thanks Jacques for your help.

--
Ashish

On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 3:31 PM, Jacques Le Roux <
[hidden email]> wrote:

> Done following Ray's suggestion http://docs.ofbiz.org/x/r
>
> Jacques
>
> From: "Ray" <[hidden email]>
>
>  +1
>>
>> Consistency is good and if it makes it easier to work with then it should
>> be encouraged.
>>
>> I would suggest to use the OFBIZ number first:
>>  OFBIZ-number_featureDescription.patch
>> This would generally sort/group the files to 1 area which for list views
>> in file explorers can be handy.
>>
>> Ray
>
>