Process

[Ken Causey]

Thanks Stef, it sounds like you and I are in agreement at least.

Ken

On Mon, 2005-12-12 at 20:55 +0100, stéphane ducasse wrote:
> On 12 déc. 05, at 20:38, Ken Causey wrote:
> 
> > On Sun, 2005-12-11 at 21:49 +0100, Cees De Groot wrote:
> >> On 12/11/05, Adrian Lienhard <adi at netstyle.ch> wrote:
> >>> Ken argued that it would be better to track each step on Mantis. I
> >>> think Stef's (see his reply below) means the same.
> >>>
> >>> How do we decide?
> >>
> >> Well, I think I sort of missed why it would be good to burden the
> >> integration team with Mantis administrativia - if the proponents  
> >> could
> >> point out their arguments, we could sleep over it and then see how
> >> everyone involved thinks :).
> >
> > I think it is extremely important that the entire process be  
> > completely
> > transparent.  To this end I believe it should be documented in one  
> > place
> > and for the moment the Mantis issue seems like the best place.
> >
> > I don't understand why you consider the following to be a burden:
> >
> > 1.  When the person who submits a 'fix' to the inbox submits it he
> > includes the URL to the report in Mantis in the description.
> 
> ok easy
> >
> > 2.  The release team member that harvests the fix clicks that link.
> >
> >   2a. If the release team member is not already logged in (login  
> > can be
> > saved when logging in which sets a cookie and does not require you to
> > relogin every time you go to the site) then he logs in.
> >
> > 3.  The release team member selects 'closed' from the 'Change Status
> > To:' and hits the button.
> >
> > 4.  The release team member adds a quick note explaining that this fix
> > was harvested in update X and hits the button to mark the issue  
> > closed.
> 
> This is what I was already doing.
> I like the idea that we closed since lot of mistakes or problems can  
> show up
> at integration time.
> 
> >> Summary of 'my' position: it is not necessary to burden the
> >> integration team with Mantis work; we could track everything just as
> >> well by having the stewards team point to Mantis in their MC comments
> >> and vice versa.
> >
> > But it's not tracked in one easy to find place.  Also I see the  
> > problem
> > that a single issue is not mapped necessarily to a single MC and so  
> > the
> > question then becomes do you annotate the same information in every
> > associated MC.
> 
> Yes this is important since this way I can track all the slices in  
> different mc packages
> in case of problems ;)
> 
> Stef
> 
> >
> > Ken
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/v3dot9/attachments/20051212/7c7eba44/attachment.pgp