Sounds fine to me. Strange there aren't more voices joining in. Paul
Paul Hanchett ------------------- Infotainment Engineer MSX on behalf of Jaguar Land Rover One World Trade Center, 121 Southwest Salmon Street, 11th Floor, Portland, Oregon, 97204 Email: [email protected] ------------------- Business Details: Jaguar Land Rover Limited Registered Office: Abbey Road, Whitley, Coventry CV3 4LF Registered in England No: 1672070 On Thu, Nov 7, 2013 at 6:32 PM, Yoonsoo Kim <[email protected]> wrote: > > > -----Original Message----- > > From: Hanchett, Paul [mailto:[email protected]] > > Sent: Friday, November 08, 2013 6:05 AM > > To: Yoonsoo Kim > > Cc: Mats Wichmann; [email protected] > > Subject: Re: [Dev] [Remind] API Change Request(ACR) Review Process > > > > Sounds OK to me but I have to admit that so far I don't have much skin in > > this > > game. > > No problem. My experiences with this process have been gained from Samsung > internal development. I actually don't know what will happen with the > public > development but we can discuss situations on this list and make a > consensus on > how to deal with them whenever unexpected event happens. So, I don't think > the > initial process is perfect. > > > Is there an easy way to make this aging automatic? Also, are ACR's > either > > accepted as-is or rejected? Do we need a "hold" status for things > neither > > approved nor rejected but under discussion? Maybe that's already taken > > care of? > > Typically each reviewer will give various comments on each ACR. I expect > that > most ACRs(maybe 99%?) be modified during review. If she is satisfied with > the > ACR, she will give "Reviewed-by" tag. I don't think we need "hold" status > because each ACR is actually being "hold" and can't go to the next step > during > review. As far as automatic aging concerned, I expect that implied > rejection > case will be very rare and it's not too late to deal with the case of too > many > implicitly rejected ACRs when it really happens. > > > Paul > > > > > > > > Paul Hanchett > > ------------------- > > Infotainment Engineer > > MSX on behalf of Jaguar Land Rover > > One World Trade Center, 121 Southwest Salmon Street, 11th Floor, > Portland, > > Oregon, 97204 > > > > Email: [email protected] > > ------------------- > > > > Business Details: > > Jaguar Land Rover Limited > > Registered Office: Abbey Road, Whitley, Coventry CV3 4LF > > Registered in England No: 1672070 > > > > On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 9:40 PM, Yoonsoo Kim <[email protected]> > > wrote: > > What do you think about the following rule? > > > > "An ACR which does not get any comments from anyone of ACR reviewers for > > two > > weeks is considered to be implicitly rejected" > > > > For now, we can settle on two weeks period. If someone raises an issue > about > > this period, let's reconsider it. > > If none has an opinion against this, I'll update the wiki page for ACR > > review > > process. > > > > BR, > > --- > > Yoonsoo Kim(ys71.kim AT samsung.com) > > Principal SW Engineer/Software Architect > > Mobile R&D Office > > Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. > > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Hanchett, Paul [mailto:[email protected]] > > > Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 2:10 PM > > > To: Yoonsoo Kim > > > Cc: Mats Wichmann; [email protected] > > > Subject: Re: [Dev] [Remind] API Change Request(ACR) Review Process > > > > > > Implied rejection seems right then, if combined with a reasonable age > gate > > > (what would be reasonable?) > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Paul Hanchett > > > ------------------- > > > Infotainment Engineer > > > MSX on behalf of Jaguar Land Rover > > > One World Trade Center, 121 Southwest Salmon Street, 11th Floor, > Portland, > > > Oregon, 97204 > > > > > > Email: [email protected] > > > ------------------- > > > > > > Business Details: > > > Jaguar Land Rover Limited > > > Registered Office: Abbey Road, Whitley, Coventry CV3 4LF > > > Registered in England No: 1672070 > > > > > > On Wed, Nov 6, 2013 at 9:00 PM, Yoonsoo Kim <[email protected]> > > > wrote: > > > Hi Paul, > > > > > > Thanks for your comments. > > > Please, find my inline comments. > > > > > > BR, > > > --- > > > Yoonsoo Kim(ys71.kim AT samsung.com) > > > Principal SW Engineer/Software Architect > > > Mobile R&D Office > > > Samsung Electronics Co., Ltd. > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > > From: Hanchett, Paul [mailto:[email protected]] > > > > Sent: Thursday, November 07, 2013 1:01 PM > > > > To: Yoonsoo Kim > > > > Cc: Mats Wichmann; [email protected] > > > > Subject: Re: [Dev] [Remind] API Change Request(ACR) Review Process > > > > > > > > It would be better for an unreviewed item to be escalated for > > > consideration by > > > > another reviewer-- > > > > > > > Who will escalate an unreviewed item to whom? > > > The practical thing is that reviewers are very unlikely to fail to > review > > > ACRs according to my experiences. > > > So, if you think "implied consent" rule is problematic, then I'd like > to > > > propose following "implied rejection" rule. The escalation rule may > impose > > > another complexity to the process. > > > One more thing I want to tell you is that discussion on feature itself > and > > > design alternatives will be discussed on JIRA and the dev mailing > list. An > > > ACR is a kind of a sub-item of a predefined work, not creating a new > work. > > > > > > > Do you really want the failure of a reviewer to complete their task > to > > > result in > > > > unreviewed items being added to the work? > > > > > > > > Seems wrong to me... > > > > > > > > Paul > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Paul Hanchett > > > > ------------------- > > > > Infotainment Engineer > > > > MSX on behalf of Jaguar Land Rover > > > > One World Trade Center, 121 Southwest Salmon Street, 11th Floor, > > > > Portland, > > > > Oregon, 97204 > > > > > > > > Email:쟰[email protected] > > > > ------------------- > > > > > > > > Business Details: > > > > Jaguar Land Rover Limited > > > > Registered Office: Abbey Road, Whitley, Coventry CV3 4LF > > > > Registered in England No: 1672070 > > > > > > >
_______________________________________________ Dev mailing list [email protected] https://lists.tizen.org/listinfo/dev
