On 03/16/2017 12:26 AM, Ralf Stephan wrote:
> The author of 1234 has IMO the responsibility to monitor 987 and do
> timely updates of 1234 when 987 changes, including canceling the
> positive flag on 1234.
>
I don't want to beat this to death, but if the author of 1234 is so
vigilant, why can't h
The author of 1234 has IMO the responsibility to monitor 987 and do timely
updates of 1234 when 987 changes, including canceling the positive flag on 1234.
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"sage-devel" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop re
I agree that setting a ticket to positive review when its dependencies
aren't yet reviewed is okay. Michael's warning should be kept in mind, but
for some tickets it's not a huge worry.
David
On Wed, Mar 15, 2017 at 7:29 AM, Michael Orlitzky
wrote:
> On 03/15/2017 08:18 AM, Simon King wrote:
>
On 03/15/2017 08:18 AM, Simon King wrote:
>
> Assume there is ticket 1234 that depends on ticket 987. Moreover,
> assume that 987 needs work. Would it still be possible to give
> a positive review to 1234? Of course, 1234 would only be merged
> after 987 received a positive review, too.
>
> I re
Hi!
Vincent Delecroix and I are recalling different advices concerning
"how to review a ticket that has dependencies". Since I think the
question is important, I'd like to get a clarification of our
policy.
Assume there is ticket 1234 that depends on ticket 987. Moreover,
assume that 987 needs wo
I just noticed that there are *109* "needs review" tickets. Looking
through the list at http://trac.sagemath.org/sage_trac/report/10 , I see
some extremely cool pieces of code in trac.
Just a reminder...
Thanks,
Jason
P.S. There are 17 positive reviews waiting to be merged and 103 "needs
