Hanno Schlichting <[email protected]> writes: > The exact way to involve the UI and documentation team needs to be > defined. I think we should write up the process first and then sent it > for comments to the two others team. We can incorporate their feedback > in terms of when and how they like to be involved.
It seems like it's important that this part be both structural and lightweight. By structural I mean there should be more than just a "we should think about docs when discussing the PLIP" gesture. We could define this either through procedure alone or through the tools. Could we include reviews by the other teams in the Trac workflow for PLIPs? That would remove any requirement that someone on the FwT *remember* to check for the external team reviews. :) One way to keep these cross-checks lightweight might be to start with a statement of impact. There are code changes, for example, that have no UI impact. In such cases, it would be fast and more painless if a PLIP champion noted this. Someone from the UI team could then corroborate that the PLIP entails no UI impact and that would be the end of it. If there is an impact, then the PLIP champion would need to include full UI consideration for the impact in the PLIP. The UI team could then review both the statement of impact for accuracy and the UI consideration for sufficiency and completeness. The same would largely be true for the doc team with the exception that, IMO, all changes have a documentation impact even if it's only for developers and so there should be no option to declare no impact. Ross _______________________________________________ Framework-Team mailing list [email protected] http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team
