launchpad-dev team mailing list archive

[Jonathan Lange <jml@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On Thu, Feb 11, 2010 at 2:54 AM, Tim Penhey <tim.penhey@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I think the guts of what Aaron is getting at here is the following:
>
>  * Do you expect _all_ questions to be answered for _every_ piece of work?
>   This doesn't really work for trivial or simple bug fixes
>

I would rather that people use the list for each simple fix and say
"Answering this question would be unhelpful" rather than saying "this
bug fix is simple so I don't need to think about any of these things".

That said, the difference is subtle, the results are arguably similar
and forcing the issue on someone who doesn't want to do it would only
be leading a horse to water.

Another way of putting it: the ready-to-code list is in very much the
same spirit as pre-implementation calls. To me, it's a good list of
things to talk about in such a call. But even if you think a change is
too small to merit a call, it might be worth flicking through the
ready-to-code list, either answering in your head or explaining
patiently to your teddy bear.

Does this help?

>  * Is the "Launchpad Enhancement Proposal Process" necessary for _every_
>   enhancement?  Even minor ones?
>

No. This is explained on the page. I recall you raising this point at
the meeting.

It's there to help plan the feature and to QA it on the other end. If
you don't think it helps in a specific case, don't use it. If in
doubt, ask someone, especially me.

If you don't think it helps *in general*, then I want to hear that now.

jml