What shall be the procedure of peer review of CMS website changes? Is it examine patches in JIRA just like source code is, or is it to commit changes and observe them on the staging server http://lucene.staging.apache.org/ ? (or perhaps it depends)
I like these things about the CMS: * Stuff is staged first, providing an opportunity to revert or modify something before it's public (published). * The staging server means people can visually see the effect. Fairly important for a CMS. * Being SVN based, if someone wants to see what I did, they can simply use conventional SVN tooling. IMO, because of these benefits, we probably don't need to bother with using patches and JIRA. p.s. I already did a quick edit to the website to get my name in the committer list. It's staged; I don't have publishing permissions (AFAIK, I didn't try). ~ David ----- Author: http://www.packtpub.com/apache-solr-3-enterprise-search-server/book -- View this message in context: http://lucene.472066.n3.nabble.com/CMS-peer-review-process-tp3749488p3749488.html Sent from the Lucene - Java Developer mailing list archive at Nabble.com. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
