On Feb 17, 2008, at 3:38 PM, Tom Lazar wrote:
judging by andi's summary and the recent reviews we currently have the following plips that have only one review


thanks tom for putting together that overview. i've made it home a little bit earlier and decided to double check things while i was reading up on review notes anyway...

#187: Working Out-of-the-box WebDAV                     raphael
#202: Support inline validation and editing [...]       raphael
#207: Allow Custom Portlet Managers                     andi
#208: Adapter-Based Local Role Lookup                   andi
#212: Use jQuery Javascript Library                     tom
#215: Include new KSS versions                          tom
#217: Use Adaptation for Workflow Assignment            andi
#220: Improve browser layer support                     andi

turns out that #220 has also been reviewed by raphael, and he's had a look at #212 as well. otherwise the list's complete. however, considering that a few of those are not exactly trivial, i don't think we can leave it at that. imho, _at least_ #187, #212 and #215 need to be reviewed for a second time, and #202 and #212 should probably also see another round of click-tests. i'd like to get some feedback about this, most importantly, but not exclusively from the other team members!

also, we now would need to read all the remaining review notes and cast our votes based on them. does that mean, we need to check out all plips because not all review notes have been posted to the PLIPs in the PSC.

all PLIPs[*] contain clickable links to their respective review bundles, which makes it rather easy to get to the review notes in question.

where do we collect the votes? again in the PSC or here on the list?

like i said, please cast them "in the respective tickets". collecting and counting them from posts to the lists will take me much longer again, and this way the load gets distributed a little more...

based on my own reviews and those that i have read, cast a +1 on the following

please cast these votes again in the trac tickets, and please also cast votes on the PLIPs not in your list. btw, the vote should normally be either be -1 or +1. "abstained" should only be used when the voter was involved in the implementation of the PLIP, or else needs some give some good reason, imho. we don't want to end up with draws.

cheers,


andi

[*] except for #209, which has no bundle

--
zeidler it consulting - http://zitc.de/ - [EMAIL PROTECTED]
friedelstra├če 31 - 12047 berlin - telefon +49 30 25563779
pgp key at http://zitc.de/pgp - http://wwwkeys.de.pgp.net/
plone 3.0.5 released! -- http://plone.org/products/plone

Attachment: PGP.sig
Description: This is a digitally signed message part

_______________________________________________
Framework-Team mailing list
Framework-Team@lists.plone.org
http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team

Reply via email to