Perhaps approvers should not have permission to make edits on other peoples things. I actually thought this was a bug.
I logged a bug agsint Source Juicer, because I have had approvers edit a spec file I submitted, and the approver edited in a way that caused the spec file to be invalid. An info... field was added and the approver typed in ingo... IMO, approvers sould never edit specs. They should log comments such as: You need to add this line: blablah after blahblah or whatever. The submitter needs to be responsible for all edits. This is the way it is done in CRT reviews/approvals. a CRT advocate never makes a change to the CRT request. CRT advocates can approve, hold, reject. The behavior is to approve or work with the requester advising how to make the request correct. IE. Please add testing, please answer this/that, you are missing X in the bug please fix it, etc. Never I change X in your CRT request/source tree/spec file... Doug. Dermot McCluskey wrote: > My point is that if a submitter gets 2 +1s and then an > Approver makes a trivial edit to one of their files (for > whatever reason - maybe even a mistake), then the submitter > might be irritated that they have to go getting votes again. > > Is this a concern? > > - Dermot > > > On 05/08/09 10:41, Jim Walker wrote: >> Andras Barna wrote: >>> yes >> >> Then, it resets for them too. The vote reset should be tied to the >> resubmit button. >> >> The code needs to be stable before voting, and they can always revote >> quickly if they like. >> >> Cheers, >> Jim >> >>> On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 12:27 PM, Jim Walker <James.Walker at sun.com> >>> wrote: >>>> Dermot McCluskey wrote: >>>>> Shawn Walker wrote: >>>>>> Luis de Bethencourt wrote: >>>>>>> Hey guys, >>>>>>> >>>>>>> We have two packages in Source Juicer that have already been >>>>>>> voted twice >>>>>>> positively, they have been promoted to contrib and now the >>>>>>> submitter has >>>>>>> done some fixes and the packages are waiting to be pushed. This >>>>>>> is something >>>>>>> that hasn't been clarified in the policy. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> My opinion is that the package should be voted twice positively >>>>>>> again to >>>>>>> be promoted. What this means is that the voting counter goes back >>>>>>> to zero >>>>>>> for every resubmission. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Is everybody OK with this? Any thoughts/opinions? >>>>>> I agree with the voting counter being reset any time the submitter >>>>>> makes >>>>>> changes to the materials in the submission. >>>>> Only the submitter? What if an approver changes a file - should >>>>> that also >>>>> reset the counter? >>>> Approvers can change files? >>>> >>>> Cheers, >>>> Jim > _______________________________________________ > sourcejuicer-discuss mailing list > sourcejuicer-discuss at opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/sourcejuicer-discuss
