The only other thing I would add to David’s
excellent summary is that regressions are taken very seriously, while new
functionality (in the limit, API changes) is viewed with prejudice.
From:
wtp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:wtp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of David M Williams
Sent: Monday, September 18, 2006
11:40 AM
To: wtp-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
Subject: Re: [wtp-pmc] PMC
approval..
Here's my advice and observations. Yes, an hour is too
much. On average, I probably spend 5 to 10 minutes per bug, ... some less, some
more.
My
guess is you are "reviewing the code" too much, which is not
necessarily our job (I do it a lot, but ... that's just me).
The
main thing PMC members should review for are does the importance of fixing this
bug justify the risk to the project of changing
the
code at this late date.
So,
some subjective judgement about importance ...
and
some subjective judgment about risk ...
(you
dont' have to say if its the right fix or not :) that's helpful, but not
what is being asked of you).
I
suspect we all have an idea of what importance means ... is it a major,
frequently seen use-path ... is it a "prime use case" for the project
... does it interfere with an adopter's imagined use of WTP.
As
for risk ... there's always the obvious: amount of change, change in logic or
behavior vs. a null check, change, doc vs. change in code, to the not so
obvious is this "core code" or some fringe code not used my others.
AND
... I think it's helpful if PMC member remind component leads of the right
PROCESS ... and, if it is not documented who or how its been reviewed, or who
and how its been tested, then ... that'd be a fair request to make before you
vote.
I
hope this helps.
"raghunathan
srinivasan" <raghunathan.srinivasan@xxxxxxxxxx>
Sent
by: wtp-pmc-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxx
09/18/2006 01:21 PM
Please
respond to
"raghunathan.srinivasan@xxxxxxxxxx" <raghunathan.srinivasan@xxxxxxxxxx>;
Please respond to
"WTP PMC communications (including coordination, announcements, and
Group discussions)" <wtp-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
|
|
To
|
"wtp-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx"
<wtp-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx>
|
cc
|
|
Subject
|
[wtp-pmc] PMC approval..
|
|
Hi,
I have
been reviewing the code as part of the approval process. However, this takes
time (~1hr/bug) before I feel comfortable to approve a bug. And given that I am
new to the WTP code, there are fixes where I would prefer to abstain. But this
can lead to a bottleneck in the approval process. Am I doing the correct thing
or do you have any guideline I can use before I approve a bug?
Thanks
Raghu_______________________________________________
wtp-pmc mailing list
wtp-pmc@xxxxxxxxxxx
https://dev.eclipse.org/mailman/listinfo/wtp-pmc