[sakai2-tcc] Proposal: how to get rid of the properties documentation staleness in 2.8

Steve Swinsburg steve.swinsburg at gmail.com
Thu Sep 9 03:19:03 PDT 2010


This should also be kept current:
http://confluence.sakaiproject.org/display/DOC/Sakai+Properties+Reference

Edit access is restricted so I add comments to the relevant pages when new ones come up.

cheers,
Steve


On 09/09/2010, at 7:19 PM, Berg, Alan wrote:

> I think this would save some emails to the dev list by confused customers. I would enjoy a QA lead (problem owner) for this with a Jira ticket to collect the found issues.
> 
> Alan
> 
> Alan Berg
> QA Director - The Sakai Foundation
> 
> Senior Developer / Quality Assurance
> Group Education and Research Services
> Central Computer Services
> University of Amsterdam
> 
> http://home.uva.nl/a.m.berg
> 
> ________________________________________
> From: sakai2-tcc-bounces at collab.sakaiproject.org [sakai2-tcc-bounces at collab.sakaiproject.org] on behalf of Jean-Francois Leveque [jean-francois.leveque at upmc.fr]
> Sent: 09 September 2010 11:16
> To: sakai2-tcc at collab.sakaiproject.org
> Subject: [sakai2-tcc] Proposal: how to get rid of the properties documentation staleness in 2.8
> 
> Hi all,
> 
> I'm afraid the current properties documentation is stale.
> 
> Sometimes is even seems plain wrong.
> 
> My proposal to solve this follows:
> 1) It should be clear that code owners (Leads, MT members, Kernel
> members) of each part of the code included in the Sakai release should
> document each property their code is using. This includes both that
> their code is using the property and what the property does if it's not
> properly documented.
> 2) Not documenting should be considered at least a major issue in JIRA.
> 3) A review of the current state should be part of QA.
> 
> I know it must be a burden for code owners in the current state of
> properties documentation, but this has to be at least started for 2.8.
> Hope others may help them in this.
> 
> Could involve myself in the review if we reach a consensus and this is
> included in our 2.8 plans.
> 
> What do you think?
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> J-F
> _______________________________________________
> sakai2-tcc mailing list
> sakai2-tcc at collab.sakaiproject.org
> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai2-tcc
> _______________________________________________
> sakai2-tcc mailing list
> sakai2-tcc at collab.sakaiproject.org
> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai2-tcc



More information about the sakai2-tcc mailing list