Different review process for KCP changes?
Doug Way
dway at mailcan.com
Tue Mar 2 16:36:33 UTC 2004
Ken Causey wrote:
>Göran has been doing some excellent detective work related to my
>reported issue with code corrections in the workspace. He has tracked
>it down to a change made in update 5700 (KCP136MoveChangesLog). The
>change does not seem to be related to the purpose of the changeset.
>This is bad enough but what really bothers me is that there doesn't seem
>to have been any opportunity to review this change. I've searched and
>searched and searched and it doesn't appear that this changeset ever
>appeared on the lists. A variant number 116 did and was closed.
>
>What happened? Is there some other route that KCP changes go through?
>
>
What happened can be mostly traced back to this message:
http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/2004-February/073463.html
Basically, a bunch of inter-related KCP changesets were approved as a
group in one email thread ([KCP][ENH] KCP-0160-SystemChangeNotif). This
was easier in some ways than posting them all separately and approving
them all separately, since they really needed to be evaluated as a group.
I agree that that makes it harder to track down where that particular
changeset came from, though.
Actually, what I should have done while incorporating these is associate
each of these changesets with the BFAV thread they came from
(KCP-0160-...), so that there would have been a series of update
messages like this:
[KCP][ENH] KCP-0160-SystemChangeNotif ([update - 5698])
[KCP][ENH] KCP-0160-SystemChangeNotif ([update - 5699])
[KCP][ENH] KCP-0160-SystemChangeNotif ([update - 5700])
etc.
So then you would have seen the appropriate history in the BFAV. I'll
try to do this in the future if there are any multiple-changeset
approved posts.
- Doug
More information about the Squeak-dev
mailing list
|