Re: [epf-dev] RE: Proposal: Reviewing EPF Content

[Ricardo Balduino <balduino@xxxxxxxxxx>]

Should the first review focus on content
adequacy to the spirit of that plug-in, then the second review focus on
style, alignment to guidelines, etc?
If not, I'm afraid we get into details
on stylish issues when in fact that piece of text has to be rewritten or
removed because it may not be adequate.

Just my 2 cents, 

Ricardo Balduino
Senior Software Engineer

IBM - RUP Team | EPF Committer
www.ibm.com/rational
www.eclipse.org/epf

Jim Ruehlin/Irvine/IBM@IBMUS
Sent by: epf-dev-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx

07/19/2006 08:21 PM

Please respond to
Eclipse Process Framework Project Developers List <epf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx>

To	epf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
cc
Subject	[epf-dev] RE: Proposal: Reviewing EPF Content

… and here’s the attachment!
 
 
____________________
Jim Ruehlin, IBM Rational
RUP Content Developer
Eclipse Process Framework
(EPF) Committer
email:   jruehlin@xxxxxxxxxx
phone:  760.505.3232
fax:      949.369.0720

---

From: Jim Ruehlin/Irvine/IBM 
Sent: Wednesday, July 19, 2006 7:34 PM
To: 'Eclipse Process Framework Project Developers List'
Subject: Proposal: Reviewing EPF Content
 
Hello all,
 
Some issues have been revealed as we’ve
started to review the new OpenUP/Basic content. There are some questions
about what should be reviewed, how deep a review should go, how many reviews
are appropriate, etc. This has led to reviews that take hours, which may
not be a feasible practice as we produce more content.
 
I’ve attached a proposal for how we could
perform reviews for EPF content. It splits the review into two specific
evaluations that cover separate issues. I also made an attempt to describe
how reviews should avoid philosophical debates on the merits of the content
and instead focus on whether or not the content addresses the issues in
the Bugzilla entry.
 
Please take a look (it’s only a page of
text) and perhaps we can make a formal decision on this at the next F2F.
In the meantime it might provide a more efficient structure for validating
the content.
 
- Jim
 
____________________
Jim Ruehlin, IBM Rational
RUP Content Developer
Eclipse Process Framework (EPF) Committer
email:   jruehlin@xxxxxxxxxx
phone:  760.505.3232
fax:      949.369.0720
 [attachment "Proposed
Method Content Evaluation for EPF.doc" deleted by Ricardo Balduino/Cupertino/IBM]
_______________________________________________
epf-dev mailing list
epf-dev@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/epf-dev