I also agree that PMs should be the ones owning this, but PMs are not even keen on organizing any reviews so I felt it may be too much to expect. This is the present reality. It would be good if that improves.
---- Sent from my phone On Aug 30, 2011 10:14 AM, "Amila Suriarachchi" <[email protected]> wrote: > On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 7:19 AM, Srinath Perera <[email protected]> wrote: > >> Hi Azeez, >> >> Only real scalable way to do this is PMs to followup. Meanwhile I think we >> need to open Jiras for issues as well. Not sure how useful will be crucible, >> but we can try. Lets us discuss. >> > > +1 to make PM own that. I think it is PMs responsibility to have a better > architecture and code. > > Even for the code reviews in addition to the code review group PM of the > project should be present and he need to take the steps to ensure what ever > the changes agrees on code review goes to the code. > > When we reviewing code of another project we provide opinion on our point of > view, that may not always the best way as well. Sometimes it is not feasible > to do changes then and there as well. For an example sometimes back I had a > BAM mediator publisher code review and suggested to have a lot of changes. > Then Sumedha and Tharindu wanted to stop doing those changes at that time > and differ it for the correct time. > > thanks, > Amila. > > > >> --Srinath >> >> >> On Tue, Aug 30, 2011 at 12:43 AM, Afkham Azeez <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Folks, >>> $subject is something we need to do to ensure that whatever we have >>> discussed during the previous reviews have been implemented. For code >>> reviews, we have the Crucible projects, so the sessions leads please go >>> through those and provide status updates by the end of this week. When it >>> comes to architecture reviews, we only have the notes that are sent after >>> the reviews. IMO, that is a bit harder to manage & track. I think we should >>> use Crucible for architecture reviews as well. I will check on how that can >>> be done. In the meantime, we need to go through the old architecture review >>> notes & check what has been incorporated & what hasn't. Srinath, what is the >>> best way to do that? >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> *Afkham Azeez* >>> Director of Architecture; WSO2, Inc.; http://wso2.com >>> Member; Apache Software Foundation; http://www.apache.org/ >>> * <http://www.apache.org/>** >>> email: **[email protected]* <[email protected]>* cell: +94 77 3320919 >>> blog: **http://blog.afkham.org* <http://blog.afkham.org>* >>> twitter: **http://twitter.com/afkham_azeez*< http://twitter.com/afkham_azeez> >>> * >>> linked-in: **http://lk.linkedin.com/in/afkhamazeez* >>> * >>> * >>> *Lean . Enterprise . Middleware* >>> >>> >> >> >> -- >> ============================ >> Srinath Perera, Ph.D. >> Senior Software Architect, WSO2 Inc. >> Visiting Faculty, University of Moratuwa >> Member, Apache Software Foundation >> Research Scientist, Lanka Software Foundation >> Blog: http://srinathsview.blogspot.com/ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Carbon-dev mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/carbon-dev >> >>
_______________________________________________ Carbon-dev mailing list [email protected] http://mail.wso2.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/carbon-dev
