On Jun 6, 2012, at 1:47 PM, Mariano Martinez Peck wrote: > Hi guys. Previously, we use to mark issues as "Fixed" once someone proposed a > solution. Now we have to first put it as ""FixReviewNeeded" and then when > someone else takes the time to review it put it as "FixToInclude". Now...the > problem is that nobody reviews and issues get outdated. And then, when trying > to load the slice or .cs it does not work anyomre, or it is outdated, or > whatever. Meaning that it has to be regenerated and we spend the double of > time. So, what can we do to improve this???? ideas: > > 1) We should be more confident ourselves. Imagine we have proposed something > and it is as "FixReviewNeeded". If we have run the tests, and we didn't > break anything, and the problem is really fixed, and the topic is not > something REALLY critical, and no one has reviewed your issue, why not to > putting it as "FixToInclude" ?
The problem here is the objectivity, or the lack of knowledge :) Usually when I post a fix, I have tried it, it works in my image etc. But it happened that it breaks something hidden somewhere because of a side effect I wasn't aware of :) > 2) We really need people helping review changes. There are only a few guys > that do this. You DON'T need to be an expert. "FixReviewNeeded" does not mean > "HasToBeReviewedByAGuruExperiencedHacker". It just means "it just requires > another eyes". So, please, help us review issues. Is the only way to improve. But I totally agree with this :) Reviewing fix can be really easy and fast :) Maybe we should also use more often the flag "Easy" or "Difficult". I admit doing that form time to time, just take the "Easy" ones and review them :) But in general, I think that more people should review :) And when a fix break something, nobody checks who was the poster or who was the reviewer :) My 2cts, Ben > so, what do you think? > > > -- > Mariano > http://marianopeck.wordpress.com >
