[theme-reviewers] New Ticket Resolution
edward.caissie at gmail.com
Thu Oct 14 14:10:03 UTC 2010
My point is the issues are either minor or they are not ... obviously the
flexibility to approve themes with "minor" issues should and is being used
... but, and I write again, if they are *required* to be fixed with the next
revision then they should have been *required* to be fixed with the current
version as they were IMO not "minor" to begin with if the reviewer is
resolving as "not-approved" with the next revision.
If the same "minor" issue was later decided to be not a "minor" issue then
that is a different matter.
On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 10:03 AM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net> wrote:
> I disagree. We need *some* flexibility to approve tickets that have only
> minor issues.
> At the same time, if we approve a ticket with such minor issues, *with the
> expectation that those issues are addressed in the next revision*, then we
> should not let those minor issues pass in the review of the next revision.
> On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 8:42 AM, Edward Caissie <edward.caissie at gmail.com>wrote:
>> If a ticket requires a special resolution as a pointer for
>> "approved-with-next-revision-fixes" then perhaps the ticket should be
>> immediately re-reviewed for those concerns.
>> IMO, if they are relevant enough to stop future versions of the theme from
>> being approved if not addressed, they are relevant enough to stop the ticket
>> at hand from being approved.
>> On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 8:45 AM, Chip Bennett <chip at chipbennett.net>wrote:
>>> As we approve more Themes - and especially, Themes that are approved, but
>>> that have comments indicating certain issues are "Required, but Can Be Fixed
>>> in Next Revision" - I'm thinking that we might want to consider another
>>> ticket resolution: "approved-with-comments" or
>>> "approved-with-next-revision-fixes" or something along those lines.
>>> The reason? I'm seeing tickets for "next revisions" of such tickets, that
>>> seem to ignore completely the issues indicated as "Required, but Can Be
>>> Fixed in Next Revision".
>>> Of course, I'm resolving such tickets as "not-approved" - but the reason
>>> I bring it up is that we haven't really discussed how we handle such
>>> My process for a Priority #1 Queue ticket is:
>>> 1) Check previous-tickets report, to ensure ticket is in correct queue
>>> (Pross: can we get the *resolution* column to display by default on this
>>> 2) If correct queue, assign ticket to myself
>>> 3) Open previous ticket, to check for any issues indicated as "Can Be
>>> Fixed in Next Revision"
>>> 4) Diff-Review
>>> 5) Theme-Check
>>> 6) Summarize status of previous-ticket comments
>>> 7) (if necessary) Install/check activated Theme
>>> 8) Close/resolve ticket
>>> The problem I'm foreseeing, of course, is that the previous-ticket
>>> comments can very easily fall through the cracks, unless the next-ticket
>>> reviewer makes a conscious effort to check the previous ticket. We could
>>> alleviate this concern by introducing an appropriate ticket resolution, that
>>> would alert the next-ticket reviewer to the presence of any such
>>> previous-ticket issues.
>>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
> theme-reviewers mailing list
> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the theme-reviewers