[okfn-labs] Code review exchange

Wed Jun 5 18:26:59 UTC 2013

On mið 5.jún 2013 14:07, Tom Morris wrote:

> Even simple things like standard terminology are helpful.  The first one I
> looked at to get a feel for how things worked had a comment of "This is a
> no-brainer." which is apparently a sign of approval because it got merged.
> I'd suggest +1 or Google's LGTM or some other standard approval phrase
> that's unambiguous.

Yes, we haven't had any standard for how to do this but it's a really
good point! I'll decide on one approach and write it into the documentation.

> In addition to Dan's (very good) questions, I'd add:
>
> - What factors determine when a change is high enough risk to require
> depolyment to the staging server?

Hmmm... yes. I'll need to think about this (imo it would just be enough
to request it, but we might run into scheduling problems). I'll put it
into the very short doc ;-)

Awesome. I'm thrilled about this.

-- 

Tryggvi Björgvinsson

Technical Lead, OpenSpending

The Open Knowledge Foundation <http://okfn.org>

/Empowering through Open Knowledge/

http://okfn.org/ | @okfn <http://twitter.com/OKFN> | OKF on Facebook
<https://facebook.com/OKFNetwork> | Blog <http://blog.okfn.org/> |
Newsletter <http://okfn.org/about/newsletter>

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/okfn-labs/attachments/20130605/112cee59/attachment-0002.html>