Hello all,
The question of what “done” means in terms of
method content has come up as we’ve been reviewing content this week. In
other words, when can a Bugzilla entry be changed from Accepted (or Assigned)
to Resolved, and then to Verified.
I propose the following:
- A Bugzilla entry is Assigned to a content developer, who changes
the state to Accepted.
- The content developer writes
content that is complete and understandable, following the plug-in
authoring guidelines.
- The content is committed and
one person is recruited to informally review the content.
- The reviewer checks for obvious
errors, glaring omissions, and violations of the authoring guidelines. The
reviewer reports the findings via email or comments on the appropriate
Bugzilla entry.
- The content developer makes
corrections/improvements and commits
the changes. The Bugzilla entry is changed to Resolved.
- A formal review takes place
with the content developer and two others (one of which could be the
original reviewer). This is done via the phone.
- The three parties can accept
the content as-is, accept the content pending changes identified in the
formal review, or reject the content. If rejected, the Bugzilla entry is
changed back to Assigned or Accepted with comments as to why it
was rejected.
- If accepted pending changes,
the content author makes the changes and commits
them without further review.
- The Bugzilla entry is changed
to Verified after the content
as been accepted (and committed if necessary).
We should also have some kind of acceptance test where all
content is reviewed for spelling errors, consistency, globalization
considerations, etc.
What do people thing? Would this be more effective than what
we have now, or can this plan be made better?
- Jim
____________________
Jim Ruehlin, IBM Rational
RUP Content Developer
Eclipse Process Framework (EPF) Committer
email: jruehlin@xxxxxxxxxx
phone: 760.505.3232
fax:
949.369.0720
