[jbosstools-dev] ACTION REQUIRED: Migration to jgit timestamps and sprint-based fixversions

[Max Rydahl Andersen]

I rolled this change back.

To illustrate why exact dates are noise as Alexey mentions, see
https://docs.google.com/document/d/1hkn5iYLECN9L-7NK0Q-r_HwvNDpih3P8O7THoZVyGs4/edit?usp=sharing

And to answer Nick's question:
"When sprints cross months, as most do, which month should be selected?
  The start month? the end month? or the one that makes up the largest
  percentage in the sprint?"

The start month. That is how it was done from the beginning.

/max

> Nick,
>
> I also think that the new long names are too "noise". Too many 
> numbers. It's hard to read. Month is enough IMO even if we have two 
> sprints for the same month.
> I understand that we all can have different preferences. And what is 
> hard to read for us may provide additional useful information for you 
> or someone else.
> This is why it's very important to discuss such changes first and got 
> to agreement *before* changing it.
>
> Can you just revert it for now then we can discuss it later?
>
> On 06/22/2016 01:43 PM, Nick Boldt wrote:
>> I disagree.
>>
>> Using the "main month in the sprint to give an idea" is a far less
>> useful piece of information than the actual start/end dates, which
>> give you the ACTUAL dates at a glance.
>>
>> When sprints cross months, as most do, which month should be 
>> selected?
>> The start month? the end month? or the one that makes up the largest
>> percentage in the sprint?
>>
>> If you feel it's too much information, just glance away.
>>




/max
http://about.me/maxandersen
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.jboss.org/pipermail/jbosstools-dev/attachments/20160623/6d789434/attachment.html