launchpad-dev team mailing list archive

["Francis J. Lacoste" <francis.lacoste@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On November 16, 2010, Martin Pool wrote:
> On 16 November 2010 09:59, Francis J. Lacoste
> 
> <francis.lacoste@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > Hi Launchpadders,
> > 
> > Based on current practices, I've drafted a new "LEP implementation
> > review" process. This was discussed in the last team lead meetings.
> > 
> > This process is to answer the "Are we done yet?" part of the LEP process.
> > It is the process that should be followed before moving out one of those
> > cards representing a LEP on the Kanban boards.
> > 
> > What it entails:
> > 
> > - Each LEP should have an associated bug tag.
> > 
> > - When the LEP is considered complete, an implementation review should be
> > requested to the LEP stakeholders or the product strategist.
> > 
> > - They review the deployed implementation for usability, consistency and
> > ensure that the constraints of the LEP are met. Issues found are reported
> > as bugs.
> > 
> > - Discussion on the priority of those bugs ensue.
> 
> I think that's a great idea, to make sure that there are not too many
> bugs open before we move on.  I wonder if we should advertise that
> more broadly than just the individual stakeholders - perhaps a post to
> launchpad-users or the Launchpad blog to say "we think we're done with
> X".  This might draw in more people to test it and give us more data.
> (I know it might also lead to attempted bikeshedding, but we can
> handle that.)

I don't think we need to make this part integral to the policy at this stage. 
We do advertise new features at this stage on the blog and mailing lists and 
do get bug reports at this time. The process do specify that user submitted 
bugs are to be considered in the process.

-- 
Francis J. Lacoste
francis.lacoste@xxxxxxxxxxxxx

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.