Alan Coopersmith wrote: > James Carlson wrote: > > Having engineers rather than gatekeepers marking bugs as > "integrated,"> as Alan describes for non-ON gates, seems broken to > me. > > Well, it is admittedly for gates with no gatekeepers. When you have > a fraction of the developers ON does, you get by with a fraction of > theoverhead too. >
I manage a consolidation with a total of 2 developers. Even with this size the "gatekeeper" role is intact. I would suggest the wording be explicitly stated for the "gatekeeper". Then describe the role the "gatekeeper" conducts as part of the product release process. Although not staffed with a specific "gatekeeper", the consolidation I work on leaves the "integrated" status change to the one conducting the "gatekeeper" role at product release time. Joel.
begin:vcard n:Buckley;Joel fn:Joel W. Buckley tel;fax:303-272-4194 tel;home:720-226-9370 tel;work:303-272-5556 url:sse.sfbay/interop/standards org:Data Management Group;San Engineering adr:;;500 Eldorado Blvd., BRM05, Room3196;Broomfield;Colorado;80021-3400;USA version:2.1 email;internet:[EMAIL PROTECTED] title:JIST Development Lead end:vcard
_______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
