On Monday, March 24, 2003, at 07:53 PM, Daniel Vainsencher wrote:
I think we should go with this process as outlined, without any additional rules for ENH nor making any specific tags mandatory.
ok.
BUT - let all Harvesters note that we need this process to improve. And people are simply not fooled (for long) by mere statements, they track implemented policy. The extent to which we prefer simple stuff with proper tags, and require the tags to mean something, will determine community participation in the review process.
The only reason to not require reviewers is because a submission is so simple and well prepared that its goodness is self evident. If you want to include something because you like the functionality, despite it not having enough tags or being as simple as it should, avoid the temptation to "just do it" - instead solicit reviewers on the list.
Yes. Although harvesters can also add their own tags as part of an [approved] entry, if they're motivated enough about a submission. But yeah. :-)
Doug Way dway@riskmetrics.com wrote:
... Perhaps we should just allow a certain amount of time to pass (say, at least 3 days) after an item has been approved, before it gets added to the update stream. This will give people a chance to say "Hey wait a minute". However, this requires that harvesters do a reasonable job of tracking the SQFIXES page on a semi-regular basis to see what new stuff is about to go in, rather than having a summary conveniently arrive in an email.
Actually, I momentarily forgot that all SQFIXES show up as emails first, so I guess this is less of a problem than I thought. So anyone who follows squeak-dev will be able to notice when things are approved.
But anyway, I guess my point here is that even after an item is approved (but not yet incorporated as an update), it's not too late to raise an objection or add an additional comment to a submission.
- Doug Way