#10218: merge William Stein's blog post on reviewing tickets into the 
Developer's
Guide
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
       Reporter:  mvngu              |        Owner:  rws
           Type:  enhancement        |       Status:  needs_review
       Priority:  major              |    Milestone:  sage-6.2
      Component:  documentation      |   Resolution:
       Keywords:  reviewing,         |    Merged in:
  developer manual                   |    Reviewers:
        Authors:  Ralf Stephan       |  Work issues:
Report Upstream:  N/A                |       Commit:
         Branch:                     |  92dd64a7619a1baa2f57a91308e4e2e299226dd1
  u/rws/ticket/10218                 |     Stopgaps:
   Dependencies:                     |
-------------------------------------+-------------------------------------
Changes (by {'newvalue': u'Ralf Stephan', 'oldvalue': ''}):

 * status:  new => needs_review
 * commit:   => 92dd64a7619a1baa2f57a91308e4e2e299226dd1
 * keywords:   => reviewing, developer manual
 * author:   => Ralf Stephan


Old description:

> As the subject says. This is a follow-up to #10201. From
> [https://groups.google.com/group/sage-
> devel/browse_thread/thread/d83f8d87962f8a9f/ sage-devel], William Stein
> announced this blog entry:
>
> http://sagemath.blogspot.com/2010/10/how-to-referee-sage-trac-
> tickets.html
>
> It would be a shame if new developers of Sage could not easily find it.

New description:

 As the subject says. This is a follow-up to #10201. From
 [https://groups.google.com/group/sage-
 devel/browse_thread/thread/d83f8d87962f8a9f/ sage-devel], William Stein
 announced this blog entry:

 http://sagemath.blogspot.com/2010/10/how-to-referee-sage-trac-tickets.html

 It would be a shame if new developers of Sage could not easily find it.

 With the switch to git, both sections on reviewing were streamlined. The
 link to William's blog made in #10201 was presumably removed because it
 talks about mercurial.

 We make the following changes:
 * add a short summary on top of the walkthrough section (see
 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inverted_pyramid)
 * add a paragraph about reviewer's patches to in-depth section
 * refer with caveat to blog post, again, literature style

 I will discuss these changes on the grounds of me having been bitten by
 the absence of them.

--

Comment:

 New commits:
 
||[http://git.sagemath.org/sage.git/commit/?id=92dd64a7619a1baa2f57a91308e4e2e299226dd1
 92dd64a]||{{{trac 10218: improve dev man sections on reviewing}}}||

--
Ticket URL: <http://trac.sagemath.org/ticket/10218#comment:6>
Sage <http://www.sagemath.org>
Sage: Creating a Viable Open Source Alternative to Magma, Maple, Mathematica, 
and MATLAB

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"sage-trac" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
Visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/sage-trac.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/groups/opt_out.

Reply via email to