[ros-dev] Development process - once again

[Alex Ionescu]

The process doesn't depend on Step 1, but having it helps there -- it
protects modules such as Win32k and Ntoskrnl a bit more than if the
step wasn't there at all.

More importantly, it documents the process -- it leaves a paper trail,
which is a lot better than today's typical "Revert after IRC
discussion" commit logs...

Best regards,
Alex Ionescu


On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 4:41 PM, Steven Edwards <winehacker at gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sat, Jun 7, 2008 at 10:13 AM, Alex Ionescu <ionucu at videotron.ca> wrote:
>> 1<- At this step, someone responsible for win32k should've gotten the
>> bug report, and maybe had time to reject the patch
>
> This implies that module has an owner. Not every module does. Some
> people such as yourself and Fireball are adamant about reviewing what
> goes in and spotting breakages real quick. Other parts like the BSD
> code used in the network stack might not have the same level of review
> so step 1 could be a non-starter. I agree with all the other steps
> though, having branches, commit to the branch, run the test,
> integration suite does the rest of the magic and commits to the trunk
> everything should be good provided the system and tests are robust
> enough.
>
> Thanks
> --
> Steven Edwards
>
> "There is one thing stronger than all the armies in the world, and
> that is an idea whose time has come." - Victor Hugo
> _______________________________________________
> Ros-dev mailing list
> Ros-dev at reactos.org
> http://www.reactos.org/mailman/listinfo/ros-dev
>