In my experience quality is greatly enhanced by code review. Whatever we can do to have gerrit-style code review, let's do that IMO.
On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 9:53 PM, Romain Manni-Bucau <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi > > Not sure svn is the issue. What makes quality and which rules are mandatory > is more important IMO. > > Following oracle java version (with a single one late - java 6 when java 7 > is the current one) is one key i think. > > Another one would be to remove project from main sources/proper when nobody > needs work on it anymore. > > Separating each projects too...what a noise on commons cause of not > following it + which link between csv and math -> consistency? NB: no > project is too small. > Le 8 oct. 2013 04:15, "James Ring" <[email protected]> a écrit : > >> Whatever workflow we came up with, if we moved to Git I'd like to see >> Gerritt (https://code.google.com/p/gerrit/) used for code review. >> >> On Mon, Oct 7, 2013 at 7:10 PM, James Carman <[email protected]> >> wrote: >> > All, >> > >> > If we did want to move to Git, we'd probably have to figure out how >> > we'd manage our "workflow" (couldn't think of a better word). I >> > suppose we'd have a separate repo for each component? What about >> > proper vs. sandbox? How would we accommodate that paradigm? Has >> > anyone else already gone through this thought process? I must admit, >> > my git fu isn't what it should be. >> > >> > James >> > >> > --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> > >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] >> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
