[theme-reviewers] New Ticket Resolution

[Edward Caissie]

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.


Cais.

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.
>
> Chip
>
>
> 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.
>>
>>
>> Cais.
>>
>> 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
>>> tickets.
>>>
>>> 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
>>> report?)
>>> 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.
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>>
>>> Chip
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> theme-reviewers mailing list
>> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
>> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>>
>>
>
> _______________________________________________
> theme-reviewers mailing list
> theme-reviewers at lists.wordpress.org
> http://lists.wordpress.org/mailman/listinfo/theme-reviewers
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.wordpress.org/pipermail/theme-reviewers/attachments/20101014/2505c44b/attachment-0001.htm>