| Am i using the mylyn context in the right way? [message #778007] |
Wed, 11 January 2012 04:33  |
Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Hi,
actually we are evaluate the integration of mylyn in our development process. In the last sprints we used mylyn with a redmine-connector to manage our task.
One importent part of our development process is the task-review. A particular part is the codereview. In our case it is done by two developers, the developer who has done the task and a second developer of the team.
We highly use the mark as landmark feature in mylyn to mark the relevant classes or methods. This is done during the coding time. At the review the relevevant artefacts are in the visible context and the landmarks can be used as a hint for all relevant changes during the review.
Now we recognized that landmarked artefacts (e.g. types or methods) can disappear from the visible mylyn context because the priority of an artefact decreases. Up to now we thought a landmarked artefact wouldn't disappear from the visible context.
Is that a proper way to use the mylyn context?
Could it be a bug that a landmarked artefact disappears from the visible context?
Has anybody experience in doing code review by using mylyn or is that a kind of misuse?
Regards,
-paul
[Updated on: Wed, 11 January 2012 04:34] by Moderator |
|
|
| Re: Am i using the mylyn context in the right way? [message #778102 is a reply to message #778007] |
Wed, 11 January 2012 07:14  |
| Eclipse User |
|
|
|
Hi,
it sounds like you are using the context in the way that it was intended to
be used. Landmarks should have a very high interest which should only decay
after a long time (many interactions with other elements). Please file a
bug
and provide steps to reproduce the problem or if you are able to share a
context that would also help a lot to investigate this further.
I would also appreciate if you could add your thoughts to this bug which
discusses similar requirements:
341631: [discussion] decay causes elements to get filtered over time
https://bugs.eclipse.org/bugs/show_bug.cgi?id=341631
Thanks,
Steffen
paul rime wrote:
> Hi,
>
> actually we are evaluate the integration of mylyn in our development
> process. In the last sprints we used mylyn with a redmine-connector to
> manage our task. One importent part of our development process is the
> task-review. A particular part is the codereview. In our case it is done
> by two developers, the developer who has done the task and a second
> developer of the team.
>
> We highly use the mark as landmark feature in mylyn to mark the relevant
> classes or methods. This is done during the coding time. At the review the
> relevevant artefacts are in the visible context and the landmarks can be
> used as a hint for all relevant changes during the review.
>
> Now we recognized that landmarked artefacts (e.g. types or methods) can
> disappear from the visible mylyn context because the priority of an
> artefact decreases. Up to now we thought a landmarked artefact wouldn't
> disappear from the visible context.
>
> Is that a proper way to use the mylyn context?
> Could it be a bug that a landmarked artefact disappears from the visible
> context? Has anybody experience in doing code review by using mylyn or is
> that a kind of misuse?
>
> Regards,
> -paul
--
Steffen Pingel
Committer, http://eclipse.org/mylyn
Senior Developer, http://tasktop.com
|
|
|
Powered by
FUDForum. Page generated in 0.07257 seconds
Home