[email protected] wrote on 07/22/2009 02:10:07 PM:

> [email protected]
>
> Hi Steve,
>
> On 07/21/09 05:15 PM, Bing BJ Yin wrote:
> > Hi Mikhail,
> >
> > We will update the specification ASAP.
>
> Please do not do it before the new design has been reviewed and approved
> by QA and UX, as I have mentioned in my previous email.
>
> > No issue for commitment. If need be
> > I can create one. Thanks.
>
> Yes, we need an issue for this, when you open one please set me ( mav )
> in CC-field.
I remember checking in code to CWS does not need #issue. You mean this
#issue is for integration to MWS?

> Additionally it is a good practice to add issue number to the commit
> comments, like
> "#i<issue number># <text comment>"
>
> That allows in future to find the related to the change issue easily.
>
> Best regards,
> Mikhail.
>
> >
> >
> > Best Regards,
> >
> > Steve Yin
> > -------------------------------------
> > Symphony Common App and Performance
> > IBM Corporation | Lotus Software
> > Tel: 86-10-82454405
> > Email: [email protected]
> > Notes: Bing BJ Yin/China/IBM
> > Address: 2F, Ring Bldg. No.28 Building, Zhong Guan Cun Software Park,
No.
> > 8 Dong Bei Wang West Road, ShangDi, Haidian District, Beijing 100193,
> > P.R.China
> >
> >
> >
> > From:
> > Mikhail Voytenko <[email protected]>
> > To:
> > [email protected]
> > Date:
> > 2009-07-21 21:32
> > Subject:
> > Re: [sw-discussion] Removed IBM(C) from IBM modified files in CWS
> > wordencryption
> >
> >
> >
> > Hi all,
> >
> > Sorry for the small delay with the integration.
> > The cws was rebased on DEV300_m51, it took a little bit more time than
> > expected because of local problems with the rebase process.
Additionally
> > I had a one week vacation, that has also delayed handling of the cws.
> >
> > The only remaining task currently is to update the specification ( the
> > implementation should be reviewed by QA- or UX-engineer before ). After
> > that the cws will be ready for QA. I think the cws will get ready for
QA
> > status this week.
> >
> > By the way, which issue was used to commit the changes to the cws?
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Mikhail.
> >
> >
> > On 07/11/09 05:13 PM, Mathias Bauer wrote:
> >> Christian Lohmaier wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi *,
> >>>
> >>> On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 10:32 AM, Ming Fei Jia<[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >>>> Mathias,
> >>>>
> >>>> Any status update for the integration? We are free to privide any
> > support
> >>>> if needed. Thanks.?
> >>> The wordencryption cws is
> >>> * not set to public
> >> That indeed should be changed.
> >>
> >>> * is still in state "new"
> >> This is fine as we are still in the review state.
> >>
> >>> * doesn't have any dates nor target-release set
> >> This is fine also as it doesn't make sense to set any dates until you
> >> know if there is still something to be done.
> >>
> >> So I think that this wasn't the kind of status update that Ming Fei Ja
> >> expected. :-)
> >>
> >> Ciao,
> >> Mathias
> >>
> >
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > 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]
>

Reply via email to