Le 29/05/2012 09:50, Nicole Engard a écrit : > Just to add in my opinion here. > > As someone who has been in Paul's situation, where a library (that has > paid us to write them code) has been testing (and sometimes using the > code in production) and has confirmed that things work I agree that > putting a sign off in their name should be an okay practice. I also > agree though that someone not from my company should QA the patch - > that extra set of outside eyes is essential. Thanks Nicole, I'm "happy" to see BibLibre is not the only one facing this kind of problem.
> What I don't think should happen (and I don't think anyone is > suggesting this) is that a patch that is written by our company and > signed off by our partner should have to wait for another sign off > before hitting the QA queue. Agreed. Side comment: in some cases, as RM, I switch back a QAed patch to "need sign-off" for some patches that are large and/or require a very careful testing. That's quite uncommon, and not related to who made/signed-off the patch. -- Paul POULAIN http://www.biblibre.com Expert en Logiciels Libres pour l'info-doc Tel : (33) 4 91 81 35 08 _______________________________________________ Koha-devel mailing list [email protected] http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-devel website : http://www.koha-community.org/ git : http://git.koha-community.org/ bugs : http://bugs.koha-community.org/
