Quality control and FOSS rant

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



Give the choice between the meant-to-be-serious guidelines, which I think can be paraphrased as:

      We really want to have a pretty open check-in policy. But this means that you should be extra careful if you check something in.

...and the meant-to-be-funny chart that shows everything going through code review, I think I'd
choose the code review. I hate code reviews as much as the next person, but if you're working on a
real-world, widely-used, huge application like JDK, the need for quality trumps the individual need to
avoid pain.



Hi Andy,

On Thu, 2008-01-10 at 12:22 -0500, Andy Tripp wrote:
> >   
> I suppose this is more of a troll than a criticism, sorry about that.

No worries. We know trolls and how to deal with them.
We do have a flow chart that people have to follow when contributing to
GNU Classpath. It is all very formal really:
http://gnu.wildebeest.org/~mark/patch.png

Seriously, follow the guidelines published at:
http://www.gnu.org/software/classpath/docs/hacking.html#SEC9
And at the developer wiki:
http://developer.classpath.org/mediation/ClasspathFirstSteps
and you will get a long way.

> Again, sorry for the rant/troll.

It was fun. Keep it cool!

Cheers,

Mark


[Index of Archives]     [Linux Kernel]     [Linux Cryptography]     [Fedora]     [Fedora Directory]     [Red Hat Development]

  Powered by Linux