Ticket #1634 (closed unplanned_task: obsolete)

Opened 10 years ago

Last modified 9 years ago

GROUP_CHANGES_R0

Reported by: meddle, gogov Owned by: meddle
Priority: major Milestone: M05_PRE5
Component: PRO_LIB_ENTITIES Version: 2.0
Keywords: change, changes Cc:
Category: CORE Effort: 6
Importance: Ticket_group:
Estimated Number of Hours: Add Hours to Ticket:
Billable?: Total Hours:
Analysis_owners: meddle, deyan Design_owners: meddle
Imp._owners: meddle Test_owners:
Analysis_reviewers: dido Changelog:
Design_reviewers: Imp._reviewers:
Test_reviewers: Analysis_score: 3.5
Design_score: 3 Imp._score: 3.5
Test_score: 0

Change History

comment:1 Changed 10 years ago by meddle

  • Category changed from unknown to CORE

comment:2 Changed 10 years ago by gogov

  • Owner changed from meddle, gogov to gogov
  • Status changed from new to s1a_analysis_started

comment:3 Changed 10 years ago by deyan

  • Cc deyan added

Batch update from file newimport.csv

comment:4 Changed 10 years ago by deyan

  • Cc gogov added; deyan removed

I suppose "gogov" should be in analysis_owners field? The wiki page is fake.

comment:5 Changed 10 years ago by meddle

  • Cc gogov removed
  • Effort set to 6

comment:6 Changed 10 years ago by meddle

  • Design_owners set to meddle
  • Keywords change, changes added
  • Imp._owners set to meddle
  • Analysis_owners set to meddle

comment:7 Changed 10 years ago by meddle

  • Description modified (diff)
  • Summary changed from GROUP_CHANGE_R0 to GROUP_CHANGES_R0

comment:8 Changed 10 years ago by meddle

  • Status changed from s1a_analysis_started to new

Cleaning...

comment:9 Changed 10 years ago by meddle

  • Owner changed from gogov to meddle
  • Status changed from new to s1a_analysis_started

Starting analysis.

comment:10 Changed 10 years ago by meddle

  • Status changed from s1a_analysis_started to s1b_analysis_finished
  • Analysis_owners changed from meddle to meddle, deyan

With the conversations with the analysators and writing some ideas it took me about 1h.

comment:11 Changed 10 years ago by dido

  • Status changed from s1b_analysis_finished to s1c_analysis_ok
  • Analysis_reviewers set to dido
  • Analysis_score changed from 0 to 3.5
  • Please in the next revision consider normal and advanced state for the changes palette so the user could be introduced to skip and undo skip in appropriate way.
  • Also human readable name of the changes and short description will fit nice.

Analysis reviewed 3.5p (1h)

comment:12 Changed 10 years ago by meddle

  • Status changed from s1c_analysis_ok to s2a_design_started

starting design...

comment:13 Changed 10 years ago by dido

For the next revision will be nice to make changes names and description localization. In order to do that instead of passing the change itself, we could pass message that includes the change values. This way we'll have abstract layer that reads this message and localize the content, and another one that execute the command.

comment:14 Changed 10 years ago by meddle

  • Status changed from s2a_design_started to s2b_design_finished

Maybe that is all... Took me about 8 hours, with the diagrams, tests, bug-fixing an writing code.

comment:15 Changed 10 years ago by gogov

If I had the Power To Review (e.g. be an Integrator), I would the the following design review:

  • I fixed the English a bit to make it non-ambiguous because at some places I had to think hard to understand what's the idea. Talked out some stuff with His Holly Meddleness, so now things are clarified.
  • First UML diagram is a bit unreadable, could be larger next time.
  • Second UML diagram has some of the method signatures truncated so this could be fixed next time.
  • DummyChange could be renamed to EmptyChange
  • Generating Change sequence numbers should just get the current time because this approach can easily be broken.
  • Some of the methods have names which a bit confusing at least to me:
    • hasOpenedGroup() might be groupOpened().
    • willCloseGroup() might be groupClosing().

I think popular conventions would name these methods as I propose.

I've got other comments but they are implementation comments and I'll list them when I do a fake implementation review.

Again, if I had the Power To Review, I would give 4.0 to this design (2.5 if I consider the English but I love Meddle so much I wouldn't do this to him) because it's quite detailed and well-structured.

An I would say that this took me 2.5h to review (:

So, now pap will do the real review.

comment:16 Changed 10 years ago by pap

  • Status changed from s2b_design_finished to s3c_implementation_ok
  • Design_score changed from 0 to 3
  • Imp._score changed from 0 to 3.5
  • Old taks considered with good enough quality.
  • Super review to Implementatition_OK

comment:17 Changed 9 years ago by deyan

  • Status changed from s3c_implementation_ok to closed
  • Resolution set to obsolete

Batch update from file query-obsoleted.csv

Note: See TracTickets for help on using tickets.