Hi,
I would a little discussion about what our process is for bringing in
new features, as far as I know we don't have one.
I recently encountered a new feature I was supposed to test. I did not
find enough information in the bug to know what to test. The bug said
"as discussed on dev" but did not link to the discussion or even give a
close approximation of what the subject line of the thread was, making
it hard to find the thread. Then after finding the discussion on dev
and reading the 14 or so messages, I find I am still not certain what
was decided.
Operating in this way seems like a poor use of time, and I think we
could do better with a little more agreement on how to proceed with
discussions on new features.
My ideas of what a new process discussion/ implementation process would
look is:
0) It should be discussed on dev
1) Towards the end of discussion on a new feature there should be a
"last call" proposal sent out that clearly describes what the proposed
change is.
2) At the end of the discussion there should be a "Decision:" email that
sums up what was decided
3) The new feature should have a bug, and it should be marked as a task
4) The bug should contain the summary from the "decision" email and link
to the discussion thread.
What do others think about this idea?
Dan
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _ _
Open Source Applications Foundation "chandler-dev" mailing list
http://lists.osafoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/chandler-dev
