X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft Exchange V6.5
Received: by onstor-exch02.onstor.net 
	id <01C87FC4.4AA7CB2A@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>; Thu, 6 Mar 2008 12:57:22 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
	charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Content-class: urn:content-classes:message
Subject: RE: PERFORCE change 28203 for review
Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 12:57:22 -0700
Message-ID: <BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E08C0ECD5@onstor-exch02.onstor.net>
In-Reply-To: <20080306114734.6305e651@ripper.onstor.net>
X-MS-Has-Attach: 
X-MS-TNEF-Correlator: 
Thread-Topic: PERFORCE change 28203 for review
Thread-Index: Ach/wuxzaOraldsZR3aCiIiADgAHdAAAMaew
References: <WEBMAILLAMwBnuPnUKw000085dd@mail.onstor.com><20080306101705.17260a80@ripper.onstor.net><BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E08C0EC16@onstor-exch02.onstor.net><20080306105217.525eb047@ripper.onstor.net><BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E08C0EC71@onstor-exch02.onstor.net><20080306111341.2d075dcc@ripper.onstor.net><BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E08C0EC90@onstor-exch02.onstor.net> <20080306114734.6305e651@ripper.onstor.net>
From: "Maxim Kozlovsky" <maxim.kozlovsky@onstor.com>
To: "Andy Sharp" <andy.sharp@onstor.com>

Not convincing at all. Any company which switches to another bug
database without preserving old defects is completely retarded. You can
write yourself a script which will print defect descriptions from p4
change if you have trouble looking them up.=20

>-----Original Message-----
>From: Andy Sharp
>Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 11:48 AM
>To: Maxim Kozlovsky
>Subject: Re: PERFORCE change 28203 for review
>
>On Thu, 6 Mar 2008 11:20:32 -0800 "Maxim Kozlovsky"
><maxim.kozlovsky@onstor.com> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> >-----Original Message-----
>> >From: Andy Sharp
>> >Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 11:14 AM
>> >To: Maxim Kozlovsky
>> >Subject: Re: PERFORCE change 28203 for review
>> >
>> >On Thu, 6 Mar 2008 11:08:29 -0800 "Maxim Kozlovsky"
>> ><maxim.kozlovsky@onstor.com> wrote:
>> >
>> >> Well to bad I was not on that meeting otherwise we would never
>> >> reach
>> a
>> >> consensus on such an idiotic convention.
>> >
>> >Oh, you were there all right.
>> >
>> >What's so idiotic about it?
>> [MK]
>> What is not?
>
>
>I think I see.  I tried to ask nicely.  If I did not succeed in asking
>nicely, I apologize.  I'm not always very good at doing that.
>
>There are a couple of very good reasons to do it, and I know it because
>I've experienced it, but probably you haven't.
>
>If just the bug number is put in the comment, then if the company
>switches to a different bug tracking tool, which sometimes happens,
>then the number becomes completely useless.  The other reason is that
>if a developer is digging through a series of changes to a file or
>files, if s/he has to look up a different bug number for every change,
>it is very annoying and inefficient.  But just cutting and pasting the
>headline, or even just typing in a quick paraphrase of the headline, is
>far less time consuming on the front end.  I've also been there where I
>had 40 changes to go through looking for something, and had to
>constantly look up a bug number for almost every change.  It sucked,
>and I mean sucked completely.
>
>There are other reasons as well -- for people who look at a lot of
>changes, sometimes the bug description means more than the description
>of the change itself, so in those situations it's nice to have the bug
>description handy there to read.
>
>
>> >> >-----Original Message-----
>> >> >From: Andy Sharp
>> >> >Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 10:52 AM
>> >> >To: Maxim Kozlovsky
>> >> >Subject: Re: PERFORCE change 28203 for review
>> >> >
>> >> >No, I mean ours, reached in a consensus of opinions in a software
>> >> >meeting quite a while ago. You have a problem with that?  Because
>> you
>> >> >seem to be the only developer in the group who doesn't seem to be
>> >> >able to do it, and it's not acceptable.  As a senior developer
and
>> >> >one of
>> >> the
>> >> >best we have, you of all people should be setting an example of
>> >> >discipline and professionalism to the other developers.
>> >> >
>> >> >On Thu, 6 Mar 2008 10:31:49 -0800 "Maxim Kozlovsky"
>> >> ><maxim.kozlovsky@onstor.com> wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >> You mean your convention, not ours.
>> >> >>
>> >> >> >-----Original Message-----
>> >> >> >From: Andy Sharp
>> >> >> >Sent: Thursday, March 06, 2008 10:17 AM
>> >> >> >To: Maxim Kozlovsky
>> >> >> >Subject: Re: PERFORCE change 28203 for review
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >On 6 Mar 2008 10:05:01 -0800 Maxim Kozlovsky
>> >> >> ><maxim.kozlovsky@onstor.com> wrote:
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >> Change 28203 by maximk@maximk-13 on 2008/03/06 10:04:38
>> >> >> >>
>> >> >> >> 	   22589.
>> >> >> >> 	Check if the /etc/timezone (/etc/localtime for BSD)
>> >> >> >> exists an print more appropriate message than "No such file
>> >> >> >> or
>> >> directory".
>> >> >> >> 	   Reviewed by jong.
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >Max,
>> >> >> >
>> >> >> >I'm asking again, please try to conform to our conventions for
>> >> >> >checkin comments by including both the bug number as well as
>> >> >> >the bug headline. You know you should so please do it.
