[Koha-devel] Signing-off a patch for a customer

[Paul Poulain]

Le 29/05/2012 13:50, Marcel de Rooy a écrit :
> I agree with most responses in this thread: If a company makes a patch, a customer of that company signs off, 
> it should not be QAed by that company, but by a "neutral" party.
> The QAer should even be allowed to ask for a second outside signoff if
he feels the patch needs that additional proof.

What's the QA done for ? it's looking at the quality of the code. So, a
QAer can request a 2nd signoff, but only if he feel that the code is
missing a case (like "I feel this code will work for UNIMARC, could
someone check for MARC21" ? or "work for sysprefX = OFF, must be checked
for sysprefX = ON as well". I feel that should be an uncommon case.
The RM has a more global responsibility to ensure the global consistency
of the soft.

> As Paul mentioned earlier (he does QA but does not set the status): 
> In order to prevent the appearance of pushing the process,
> you could even ask if it would be wiser to refrain from such QA
comments. (Or just mail them to the author.)
I'm not sure I understand ?
Do you mean I should not QA if I can't set the status ? Sound a very bad
idea : if I see something wrong, like an unconditionnal warn, a missing
use Modern::Perl, it must be said publicly, to avoid having another QAer
requesting this problem to be fixed

Reminder (or information in case you don't know) = I usually QA & push
patches ordered by last modification date, ASC (So the oldest 1st). If I
see something wrong while I'm reviewing, I don't understand why I should
stay silent !

HTH
-- 
Paul POULAIN
http://www.biblibre.com
Expert en Logiciels Libres pour l'info-doc
Tel : (33) 4 91 81 35 08