X-Sylpheed-Account-Id:1
S:andy.sharp@onstor.com
SCF:#mh/Mailbox/sent
X-Sylpheed-Sign:0
X-Sylpheed-Encrypt:0
X-Sylpheed-Privacy-System:
RMID:#imap/andys@onstor.net@onstor-exch02.onstor.net/INBOX	0	BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E0B8A53D0@onstor-exch02.onstor.net
X-Sylpheed-End-Special-Headers: 1
Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2008 11:30:26 -0700
From: Andrew Sharp <andy.sharp@onstor.com>
To: "Jonathan Goldick" <jonathan.goldick@onstor.com>
Subject: Re: I really need you two to get the code review done.
Message-ID: <20080908113026.2f778996@ripper.onstor.net>
References: <BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E0B8A513A@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>
	<20080908090449.406936ac@ripper.onstor.net>
	<BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E0B8A52F9@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>
	<20080908102922.267dc920@ripper.onstor.net>
	<BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E0B8A53AD@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>
	<20080908105059.11c785f5@ripper.onstor.net>
	<BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E0B8A53D0@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>
Organization: Onstor
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

On Mon, 8 Sep 2008 10:57:21 -0700 "Jonathan Goldick"
<jonathan.goldick@onstor.com> wrote:

> No one else has a problem with this method.  No one else had a problem
> getting the task done without my having to "shepard" them to do the
> job. Ron was the sole exception and his Dad is in a bad way so he was
> away from computers. =20
>=20
> I appreciate that you want to add value by improving processes.  I
> would be much more amenable to your feedback if this wasn't how it
> comes out.

Dude, that's a load of BS and excuses.  I expect better from you than
trying to invoke the nonsense "no one else" lie.  I work with all
these other people too so don't try to con me with that silliness.

=46rom my perspective, you're trying to put your responsibilities on me.
I asked you for something and you never got back to me, that's how it
looks from my end.  Yes, it would have been nice of me to remember to
ping you, but the primary responsibility is yours.

I appreciate that you have a job to do, but don't expect others to
track your tasks for you.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andy Sharp=20
> Sent: Monday, September 08, 2008 10:51 AM
> To: Jonathan Goldick
> Subject: Re: I really need you two to get the code review done.
>=20
> On Mon, 8 Sep 2008 10:34:12 -0700 "Jonathan Goldick"
> <jonathan.goldick@onstor.com> wrote:
>=20
> > I checked, the reply must have been eaten by the bberry world since
> > no one else got it either.
> >=20
> > I did include the comments at the top of the file I sent you.  The
> > full comments are in a functional spec, and I make reference to
> > that.
>=20
> Not a feasible substitute really.  I can't tell from all that what
> will be in the checkin comment and what won't.
>=20
> > In the future, please don't wait days if you don't get a response.
> > I always respond to email within hours to a day.  This was time
> > critical and I thought we were all clear on that.
>=20
> Yes, it did get lost in the blizzard of tasks and interrupts, but
> that's not terribly uncommon; the primary responsibility to shepard
> your checkin lies with you.  Feel free to shorten the ping interval
> in the future -- nothing rude about doing that IMO.
>=20
> > I do not create changelists until the code is reviewed, it reduces
> > pilot error by checking in the wrong code.
>=20
> Uh, you want to run that one again?  Because I think you have it
> backwards.  ~:^)  Review is suppose to help catch pilot error,
> including things like missing files from the changelist, extra files,
> wrong files, wrong code, occassionally even broken code.  OK, that
> last one was a stretch I admit it.
>=20
> I'll get after reviewing it now, but it does put extra work on the
> reviewer.  I'd like to move the group towards a standard convention
> for submitting code for review including encapsulating the change in a
> changelist.  That will make possible decent tool support to aid the
> review process.
>=20
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Andy Sharp=20
> > Sent: Monday, September 08, 2008 10:29 AM
> > To: Jonathan Goldick
> > Subject: Re: I really need you two to get the code review done.
> >=20
> > For one thing, it's my job as reviewer to review the code and the
> > checkin comment, a job that I take seriously and I believe, so
> > should everyone else; a changelist is the most reasonable way to
> > communicate that information.  Also, I thought you had already told
> > me that you had this contained in a changelist, so I thought I was
> > asking for something simple.  For a third thing, I don't have that
> > reply you refer to.
> >=20
> > On Mon, 8 Sep 2008 09:06:59 -0700 "Jonathan Goldick"
> > <jonathan.goldick@onstor.com> wrote:
> >=20
> > > I did reply back that evening.  There is no changelist #.  I sent
> > > you paths and a P4CLIENT, why isn't that enough?
> > >=20
> > >=20
> > >=20
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Andy Sharp=20
> > > Sent: Monday, September 08, 2008 9:05 AM
> > > To: Jonathan Goldick
> > > Subject: Re: I really need you two to get the code review done.
> > >=20
> > > On Sun, 7 Sep 2008 17:40:58 -0700 "Jonathan Goldick"
> > > <jonathan.goldick@onstor.com> wrote:
> > >=20
> > > > I'm running out of time to get this into the 4.0.1 release.  If
> > > > you cannot get to this then please say so.
> > > >=20
> > > >=20
> > >=20
> > >=20
> > > I sent you an email asking for the changelist number but didn't
> > > hear back.
