Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-harmony-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 61506 invoked from network); 13 Feb 2007 17:30:55 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 13 Feb 2007 17:30:55 -0000 Received: (qmail 19825 invoked by uid 500); 13 Feb 2007 17:31:00 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-harmony-dev-archive@harmony.apache.org Received: (qmail 19792 invoked by uid 500); 13 Feb 2007 17:30:59 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@harmony.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@harmony.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@harmony.apache.org Received: (qmail 19783 invoked by uid 99); 13 Feb 2007 17:30:59 -0000 Received: from herse.apache.org (HELO herse.apache.org) (140.211.11.133) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 13 Feb 2007 09:30:59 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.0 required=10.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (herse.apache.org: domain of mikhail.a.markov@gmail.com designates 64.233.182.189 as permitted sender) Received: from [64.233.182.189] (HELO nf-out-0910.google.com) (64.233.182.189) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 13 Feb 2007 09:30:49 -0800 Received: by nf-out-0910.google.com with SMTP id d4so360889nfe for ; Tue, 13 Feb 2007 09:30:28 -0800 (PST) DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=beta; h=received:message-id:date:from:to:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:references; b=kOcy23KKUEJedQ3/FOwv4rCEmF/hJq0dOg2xBAwGyxfEOIaUoAO049IP8dMHP8nGql+aHuCktetpMjIgd8wbWSXMqvDA8OfbAOEq7D80R6AqiCFv6cR56lagfO7eB/99udgqaKqU1Wl3zs1y57eIRdZm6Gu/yxQOYgXZB0riuAA= Received: by 10.82.167.5 with SMTP id p5mr12372078bue.1171387827715; Tue, 13 Feb 2007 09:30:27 -0800 (PST) Received: by 10.82.191.19 with HTTP; Tue, 13 Feb 2007 09:30:27 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <51abf0750702130930h3729c59bm27cd227a9b0151a3@mail.gmail.com> Date: Tue, 13 Feb 2007 20:30:27 +0300 From: "Mikhail Markov" To: dev@harmony.apache.org Subject: Re: [jira][general] Good issue resolution guideline update In-Reply-To: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_Part_34710_22303445.1171387827652" References: X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org ------=_Part_34710_22303445.1171387827652 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Content-Disposition: inline Sorry for resuming the discussion - i've missed it last week: > 2. All the patches should have an evaluation comment I'm not fully agree with the word "all" and prefer something like "complex" or "non-trivial" as usually the code says for itself without any additional comments and the explanation is much longer then the patch itself. Just use the common sense. Thoughts? Thanks, Mikhail On 2/5/07, Alexey Petrenko wrote: > > Guys, > > I think we need a little update for the "Good issue resolution guideline" > [1] > > I suggest the following additions to the "Resolving Issues.If the > issue is a bug" to make committers life much easier :) > 1. All the newly introduced message strings should be internationalized > 2. All the patches should have an evaluation comment > 3. If you change two lines of code please make sure that you patch > includes only these two lines and do not include any other changes > like code formatting. > 4. Add yourself to the list of watchers to receive comments and > concerns on your patch. > > Thoughts? Concerns? Objections? > > SY, Alexey > > [1] http://harmony.apache.org/issue_resolution_guideline.html > ------=_Part_34710_22303445.1171387827652--