Nope ;-)
On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 11:13 PM, Les Hazlewood <les_at_stormpath.com> wrote:
> I mean the actual Atlassian product Confluence. I have no experience w/
> the java.net wiki (I take it is not Confluence?)
>
>
> Les
>
> On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 3:11 PM, Werner Keil <werner.keil_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Do you mean Confluence or the (also somewhat constrained) Java.net
>> wiki?;-)
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 11:08 PM, Les Hazlewood <les_at_stormpath.com> wrote:
>>
>>> We use Jira extensively at work and we're an agile shop (Kanban
>>> specifically). While it does quite well w/ stories and epics, even that
>>> level is still somewhat constrained: I can't look at the big picture as
>>> easily as a summary wiki page that can represent all things in a glance,
>>> where groupings and sub-groupings are visually easy to grok w/ indentation,
>>> color, etc (not so w/ Jira summary views where everything is a a row).
>>> Final specs (e.g. Servlet spec) also serve this purpose: you can see what
>>> is in scope, what is nested detail and what is out of scope - all in a
>>> single glance.
>>>
>>> I'm fully willing that this could just be my mental model and how I
>>> think about information management, and if no-one else finds what I'm
>>> talking about as beneficial, I'll be fine :) Maybe I'll give a crack at
>>> forming this page for my own mental model and see if anyone else finds it
>>> beneficial. If not, we can kill it for sure.
>>>
>>> I don't suppose there is a Confluence distribution we have access to?
>>>
>>> Les
>>>
>>> On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 2:58 PM, Werner Keil <werner.keil_at_gmail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Leaving aside some realy "big gun" systems like IBM Doors (which the
>>>> client's infrastructure mandated) I've seen JIRA used quite well to define
>>>> and estimate stories.
>>>> If you haven't looked at JIRA 5 or 6 java.net provides, both "Story"
>>>> and "epic" are there (same with the clients who use it for full scale Agile
>>>> planning and estimation)
>>>>
>>>> That's the idea, not to create bugs or improvements (I don't think "new
>>>> feature" is actually offered but maybe it depends on how the java.net
>>>> project is set up there)
>>>>
>>>> Werner
>>>>
>>>> On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 10:49 PM, Les Hazlewood <les_at_stormpath.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 2:37 PM, arjan tijms <arjan.tijms_at_gmail.com>
>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Hi,
>>>>>>
>>>>>> On Mon, Mar 9, 2015 at 9:52 PM, Les Hazlewood <les_at_stormpath.com>
>>>>>> wrote:
>>>>>> > Where is discussion of design and features to be done? I see many
>>>>>> Jira
>>>>>> > issues (presumably that are up for discussion), and
>>>>>> thoughts/concepts in
>>>>>> > emails. Should we discuss as Jira comments? Or email thread posts?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The way that the process is mostly carried out in the other EGs is
>>>>>> that JIRA issues are created, which are then discussed on the EG
>>>>>> mailing list.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I think creating Jira issues before a high level outline or 'epics' or
>>>>> 'stories' (or 'topics' and 'sub topics') are defined is backwards.
>>>>> Shouldn't we all be on the same page and have an understanding of the
>>>>> higher level picture and (general) topics/sub-topics before we go debating
>>>>> specific features and tasks? The JSR is a good start, but too high level,
>>>>> and Jira issues are too low level (IMHO). More, they are myopic: when
>>>>> looking at a single jira issue, I can't see how it relates to other issues,
>>>>> where it aligns with other issues in its 'category', or where it fits in
>>>>> the general scheme of things.
>>>>>
>>>>> In other words, Jira is an issue tracker - it is marginal at best for
>>>>> feature management (whereas, Confluence - as just one of many examples - is
>>>>> better for that).
>>>>>
>>>>> My .02,
>>>>>
>>>>> Les
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>
>