From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Sebastien Vauban" Subject: Re: org-jira.el... and Org conventions (Bastien, Carsten and all) Date: Tue, 03 Jan 2012 17:25:39 +0100 Message-ID: <80hb0cvjlo.fsf@somewhere.org> References: <86hb0ez4qr.fsf@gmail.com> <80ipkt6wfe.fsf@somewhere.org> <85obuk4wax.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org-mXXj517/zsQ@public.gmane.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org-mXXj517/zsQ@public.gmane.org To: emacs-orgmode-mXXj517/zsQ@public.gmane.org Hi Bao, "Bao Haojun" wrote: > "Sebastien Vauban" writes: >> "Bao Haojun" wrote: >>> I have implemented org-jira.el, bringing org-mode and Jira system >>> together. >>> >>> Wrote a Wiki page for it on emacswiki: >>> http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/OrgJiraMode >>> >>> Hope somebody find it useful, if he/she is also using Jira and loves >>> org-mode. >> >> I had never heard of Jira, but your work definitely looks very promising. >> IMHO, it should be compared with org-x and its extension to Redmine, among >> others. > > Thanks for the praise! Jira is a "commercial" issue tracker, but it also > seems to be OSS friendly (by allowing OSS community to use the software for > free; Apache is using it, see http://wiki.apache.org/general/ApacheJira). > > Likewise I had not heard of org-x and Redmine, thanks for letting me know. > >> But this triggers, for me, another "concern" which is the very wide variety >> of ways to define the same thing. >> >> So, my point is: wouldn't it be better if we proposed standard properties >> in Org (in the manual), and implemented mappings in the Org "integration" >> packages (org-jira, org-taskjuggler, org-redmine and the like)? >> >> So, say for example that, from now on, it's more standard in Org to use >> "Assignee" (or anything else) for representing who's assigned a task, and >> have every package map the property "Assignee" to whatever keyword used in >> external tools for representing that concept? > > I can see your point, that standard thing is good, if it's already here, I > will definitely try comply to them. Thanks for your proposition. I will let others express their own meaning, but, seeing your answer, I wanted to recalibrate what I expressed. > But your worrying people need to transition from one system such as org-jira > to another such as org-x, I think they are not very often. Because if it > happens, it would mean that the COMPANY/COMMUNITY has decided to switch from > Jira to Redmine, can you imagine how often that can be? > > Besides, even if that really happens, it would also mean the > COMPANY/COMMUNITY has got a way to transition from Jira to Redmine, so there > would have already been a way to transit from org-jira to org-x: org-jira -> > Jira -> Redmine -> org-x (and vice versa). > > So my point is, if someone try to make transition easy, they should do it on > the company level, such as from Jira to Redmine. Org mode feels kind of > personal to me, and I feel good enough to be able to sync between company > issue tracking system and my org-mode, no need for it to be able to transit > to another issue tracking system's org-mode. You're right we could understand my proposition as being an easier way to change between bug tracking systems. But not only that. I gave the example of Task Juggler: wouldn't it be nice to be able -- at any point in time -- to generate a dependency graph through Task Juggler, while being able (at the same time, without touching anything) to get the tasks maintained in, let's say, Redmine (which does not offer a Gantt chart functionality IIRC)? So, the question is not really about switching from one system to another, but more about using 2 (or more) systems in parallel... While the former may be a rare occurrence in a project, I guess the latter is more a common wish. Best regards, Seb -- Sebastien Vauban