No subject
Sat Oct 16 04:25:36 CEST 2010
<br>
All patches should have at least 1 signoff before the Release Manager<br>
looks at them, (exceptions will be made for trivial patches).<br>
Preferably 2 signoffs, 1 from the QA manager and 1 from someone else.<br>
Although 1 from the QA manager will suffice.<br>
<br>
All patches should refer to a bug number<br>
<br>
Chris<br>
<br>
2010/11/11 Ian Walls <<a href=3D"mailto:ian.walls at bywatersolutions.com">=
ian.walls at bywatersolutions.com</a>>:<br>
<div><div></div><div class=3D"h5">> Everyone,<br>
><br>
> While there can be no guarantees as to whether a patch will be committ=
ed<br>
> into the Koha codebase, I think in practice there are several requirem=
ents.<br>
> =C2=A0This email is an attempt to identify a few of them, and hopefull=
y start a<br>
> discussion about whether they are truly requirements, and what others =
could<br>
> possibly be added.<br>
> 1. =C2=A0The patch must do what it claims to do, in all commonly-suppo=
rted Koha<br>
> environments<br>
> 2. =C2=A0The patch must not break existing functionality<br>
> 3. =C2=A0The patch must apply to the current HEAD of the master branch=
of the<br>
> code<br>
> 4. =C2=A0The patch must follow the Coding Style Guidelines<br>
> 5. =C2=A0The patch must be MARC-flavour agnostic<br>
> 6. =C2=A0The patch must contain appropriate copyright information<br>
> 7. =C2=A0If a database update is require, the patch must handle the up=
date both<br>
> for new installs and upgrades<br>
> 8. =C2=A0If a new feature is added, the patch must include appropriate=
Help<br>
> documentation<br>
> What do people think of these requirements? =C2=A0Are they reasonable?=
=C2=A0Should<br>
> there be more? =C2=A0I understand that there may not be any set of req=
uirements<br>
> that's completely sufficient, but if we can identify as many as po=
ssible, it<br>
> would make developers lives a bit easier, since we'd all have a be=
tter idea<br>
> what is needed for our patches to be committable.<br>
> Cheers,<br>
><br>
> -Ian<br>
> --<br>
> Ian Walls<br>
> Lead Development Specialist<br>
> ByWater Solutions<br>
> Phone # (888) 900-8944<br>
> <a href=3D"http://bywatersolutions.com" target=3D"_blank">http://bywat=
ersolutions.com</a><br>
> <a href=3D"mailto:ian.walls at bywatersolutions.com">ian.walls at bywatersol=
utions.com</a><br>
> Twitter: @sekjal<br>
</div></div>> _______________________________________________<br>
> Koha-devel mailing list<br>
> <a href=3D"mailto:Koha-devel at lists.koha-community.org">Koha-devel at list=
s.koha-community.org</a><br>
> <a href=3D"http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ko=
ha-devel" target=3D"_blank">http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman=
/listinfo/koha-devel</a><br>
> website : <a href=3D"http://www.koha-community.org/" target=3D"_blank"=
>http://www.koha-community.org/</a><br>
> git : <a href=3D"http://git.koha-community.org/" target=3D"_blank">htt=
p://git.koha-community.org/</a><br>
> bugs : <a href=3D"http://bugs.koha-community.org/" target=3D"_blank">h=
ttp://bugs.koha-community.org/</a><br>
><br>
_______________________________________________<br>
Koha-devel mailing list<br>
<a href=3D"mailto:Koha-devel at lists.koha-community.org">Koha-devel at lists.koh=
a-community.org</a><br>
<a href=3D"http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/koha-de=
vel" target=3D"_blank">http://lists.koha-community.org/cgi-bin/mailman/list=
info/koha-devel</a><br>
website : <a href=3D"http://www.koha-community.org/" target=3D"_blank">http=
://www.koha-community.org/</a><br>
git : <a href=3D"http://git.koha-community.org/" target=3D"_blank">http://g=
it.koha-community.org/</a><br>
bugs : <a href=3D"http://bugs.koha-community.org/" target=3D"_blank">http:/=
/bugs.koha-community.org/</a><br>
</blockquote></div><br>Question for Mr. 3.4 RM:<br>
<br>
Is the procedure for dealing with DB revision numbers still the same? As
far as I remember from the 3.2 development days, the procedure was to=20
patch kohastructure.sql (or sysprefs.sql, or whatever), then add the=20
update to the end of <a href=3D"http://updatedatabase.pl">updatedatabase.pl=
</a> with a generic version number,=20
like 3.01.00.XXX. Patching <a href=3D"http://kohastructure.pl">kohastructur=
e.pl</a> was left to the RM when they applied the patch.<br>
<br>
I had a crazy table on the wiki for a bit, but this seemed to work better.<=
br>
<br>
That still the consensus?<br clear=3D"all"><br>-- <br>Jesse Weaver<br>
--0016368340704f969f0494be3787--
More information about the Koha-devel
mailing list