| [epf-dev] RE: Proposal: Reviewing EPF Content |
|
… and here’s the attachment! ____________________ Jim Ruehlin, IBM
Rational RUP Content
Developer Eclipse Process
Framework (EPF) Committer email:
jruehlin@xxxxxxxxxx phone:
760.505.3232 fax:
949.369.0720 From: Jim
Ruehlin/Irvine/IBM Hello all, Some issues have been revealed as we’ve started to
review the new OpenUP/Basic content. There are some questions about what should
be reviewed, how deep a review should go, how many reviews are appropriate,
etc. This has led to reviews that take hours, which may not be a feasible
practice as we produce more content. I’ve attached a proposal for how we could perform
reviews for EPF content. It splits the review into two specific evaluations
that cover separate issues. I also made an attempt to describe how reviews
should avoid philosophical debates on the merits of the content and instead
focus on whether or not the content addresses the issues in the Bugzilla entry. Please take a look (it’s only a page of text) and perhaps
we can make a formal decision on this at the next F2F. In the meantime it might
provide a more efficient structure for validating the content. - Jim ____________________ Jim Ruehlin, IBM Rational RUP Content Developer Eclipse Process Framework (EPF) Committer email: jruehlin@xxxxxxxxxx phone: 760.505.3232 fax:
949.369.0720 |
Attachment:
Proposed Method Content Evaluation for EPF.doc
Description: Binary data