Alan Coopersmith wrote:
> James Carlson wrote:
> > Having engineers rather than gatekeepers marking bugs as
> "integrated,"> as Alan describes for non-ON gates, seems broken to
> Well, it is admittedly for gates with no gatekeepers. When you have
> a fraction of the developers ON does, you get by with a fraction of
> theoverhead too.
I manage a consolidation with a total of 2 developers. Even with this
size the "gatekeeper" role is intact. I would suggest the wording be
explicitly stated for the "gatekeeper". Then describe the role the
"gatekeeper" conducts as part of the product release process.
Although not staffed with a specific "gatekeeper", the consolidation I work
on leaves the "integrated" status change to the one conducting the
"gatekeeper" role at product release time.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Size: 348 bytes
Desc: Card for Joel Buckley <Joel.Buckley at Sun.COM>