[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Review queue/FESCo after the merge

Le jeudi 15 novembre 2007 à 11:09 +0100, Nils Philippsen a écrit :
> On Wed, 2007-11-14 at 13:32 -0800, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> > Actually, at some point the FPC made an effort to merge the 
> > ReviewGuidelines and the PackagingGuidelines so that the two were 
> > different views on the same thing.  One is a checklist of problems to 
> > check.  The other gives reasoning and notes exceptions to those rules.
> I think this is unnecessary redundancy. Couldn't there be one document
> ("PackagingReviewCookBook") that uses phrases like "<X> MUST be <Y>
> unless <some exception>"? That would serve both packagers and reviewers
> and would link to other pages containing the reasons if needed.

If we want to maintain two different views a table with a "reviewer" and
"packager" columns would make sure the two views are always in sync. I
used this kind of dual-view trick for the Fonts SIG guidelines I hope
FPC will approve next week (if it will have recovered from DST changes)


(my dual view is "spec directives" and "comments" but it could have been
"packager" and "reviewer" too)

Nicolas Mailhot

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Ceci est une partie de message numériquement signée

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]