"Mark J. Nelson" wrote: > > ...I've asked around > > whether it is possible to deliver the contents of one ARC case with > > multiple putbacks but the answers were a bit "fuzzy" > > Speaking not as an ARC member, but rather as a CRT Advocate and former > Tech Lead: > > Standard expectation is that a single ARC case will be integrated as a > single unit.
Ok... > If you intend anything else, either because a coordinated delivery is > necessary, or you plan to stage multiple deliveries for different phases > of the work, then it should be called out explicitly in the ARC case > materials. Looking at http://svn.genunix.org/repos/on/branches/ksh93/gisburn/arc/ksh93_update2/onepager.txt part 1 need to be done first and all further steps can be done independently in parallel (since there aren't any dependicies between the parts 2-10). > If I evaluate a project or RTI, and find that it's only delivering a > subset of the work specified in the ARC case materials, and that this > was not made explicit when it was reviewed by the ARC, then I typically > ask the submitter to send a note to the case log, describing what > they're doing and why, and giving the members a chance to comment. Ok... but in this case we already cut-down the ARC case to avoid that we have to deliver the putback in multiple steps. On the other side it may help to have something like that as "safety pad" to avoid that we run (again) into unexpected problems shortly before the RTI, causing either deplays or ripping-out parts of the ARC cases (for example "printf" was ripped-out from the original ksh93-integration update1 work since Don Cragun found a issue (see http://bugs.opensolaris.org/view_bug.do?bug_id=6800113) very late when the code was in the early code review stages (we droped this part in an attempt to make it for the OpenSolaris/Indiana deadline)). Do know any ARC case which we could use as precedent ? > If I have to dig to find this information, I get a little bit grumpy. > Ie if you're only delivering a subset of the case materials, please > spell it out clearly in the RTI. Otherwise it feels like you've either > been careless, or that you're trying to be sneaky. (Neither of which is > usually true, but your advocate doesn't always have all of the > information that you have...) Ok... ---- Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.mainz at nrubsig.org \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 3992797 (;O/ \/ \O;)
