I just saw the rest of this thread. Ignore this mail. _Christian
Christian Kelly wrote: > Dermot McCluskey wrote: >> On 05/08/09 18:06, Shawn Walker wrote: >>> 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? >>> >>> I'm concerned that the same person that approves the materials gets >>> to change them. >>> >>> That sort of throws the whole review process out the window. >>> >>> Why would anyone but the submitter be allowed to change the materials? >> >> As a convenience, eg the Approver spots a small, obvious >> mistake and decides to fix it themselves, rather than >> go back-and-forth with the submitter. > > Yes, it can be difficult to explain exactly what change the submitter > should make. It often saves time to just make the change and explain > it. I would prefer, at least in this early stage, to keep this > functionality. I would prefer to preclude approvers who have made > changes directly from voting rather than disable this function. > >> >> I know Christian (and others?) do this frequently, so I'll >> let them speak up for how useful this functionality is. I >> think it's also been useful for them to touch a file in order >> to kick off a build. > > This is a huge advatage - being able to trigger a build. > > _Christian > >> >> >> - Dermot >> >> >> >> >>> >> _______________________________________________ >> sourcejuicer-discuss mailing list >> sourcejuicer-discuss at opensolaris.org >> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/sourcejuicer-discuss > > _______________________________________________ > sourcejuicer-discuss mailing list > sourcejuicer-discuss at opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/sourcejuicer-discuss
