Greetings, folks:

Here is my code review announcement, as specified by the Hackystat Review Guidelines 
at:

* http://hackydev.ics.hawaii.edu/doc/Review.html

and the elements of hacky style at:

* http://hackydev.ics.hawaii.edu/hackyDevSite/doc/EHS.html

If you need how to use Jupiter, see the user's guide at:

* http://csdl.ics.hawaii.edu/Tools/Jupiter/Core/doc/UsersGuide.html

This Wednesday (09.01.2004), we will be reviewing the Daily Project
classes in the hackyReview module. Please update "hackyReview" module
from our cvs and see the files list in the jupiter jump icon to examine.

(Note that you can see the reviewing files I picked will be seen in the drop
down list of the icon after you select the "ProjectActiveTime1" review
id in the individual phase).

Here are the files to examine:

  1. DailyProjectReviewActivity.java
  2. TestDailyProjectReviewActivity.java
  3. ReviewActivityReducer.java
  4. TestReviewActivityReducer.java


Some questions for you to consider are:

  1. Currently DailyProjectReviewActivity provides the minute based review
active time because it is assumed that the individual review session
will be around couple hours. So as file active time provides hour basis,
it is better to provide hour based review active time? I think review
active should be minutes basis because it is not intuitive (e.g. What is
0.7 hours for review time?), rather, 45 minutes sounds good for review.
What do you think?

 2. As I talked to hongbing about the module content, How should
hackyReview module would be? Currently it contains Jupiter sensor, std, review
daiyanalysis, its dailyproject, and its telemetry reducer impl packages.
Because of that, the hackyReview module depends upon hackyEclipse,
hackyKernel, hackyStdExt, and hackyTelemetry.

Is it better to marge these parts to each modules? or just keep it?
My thought was that even though there would be complex dependency of
the modules, it would be better to keep the module. It's because the review
related hackystat tool package (including sensor, std, analysis,
reducer) is extensible. If some users wants review for ther hackystat
configuration, then just includes the module. What do you think?


Thanks for reviewing the code!

Takuya


================================
Takuya Yamashita
E-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
================================

Reply via email to