AF:
NF:0
PS:10
SRH:1
SFN:
DSR:
MID:<20080908113225.72aeaeec@ripper.onstor.net>
CFG:
PT:0
S:andy.sharp@onstor.com
RQ:
SSV:onstor-exch02.onstor.net
NSV:
SSH:
R:<jonathan.goldick@onstor.com>
MAID:1
X-Sylpheed-Privacy-System:
X-Sylpheed-Sign:0
SCF:#mh/Mailbox/sent
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 11:33:19 -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: <20080908113319.5f22eafc@ripper.onstor.net>
In-Reply-To: <BB375AF679D4A34E9CA8DFA650E2B04E0B8A53D0@onstor-exch02.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
X-Mailer: Sylpheed-Claws 2.6.0 (GTK+ 2.8.20; x86_64-pc-linux-gnu)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Christ, what a load of BS.  You should know better than to try to con
me with that "no one else" crap.  Or maybe yourself.  I work with all
the same people you do.  Yes, it would have been nice of me to ping you
back when I didn't hear back from you, but the primary responsibility
is yours.  Don't try to make it out like it's mine.

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.  
> 
> 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.
> 
> 
> 
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andy Sharp 
> Sent: Monday, September 08, 2008 10:51 AM
> To: Jonathan Goldick
> Subject: Re: I really need you two to get the code review done.
> 
> On Mon, 8 Sep 2008 10:34:12 -0700 "Jonathan Goldick"
> <jonathan.goldick@onstor.com> wrote:
> 
> > I checked, the reply must have been eaten by the bberry world since
> > no one else got it either.
> > 
> > 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.
> 
> Not a feasible substitute really.  I can't tell from all that what
> will be in the checkin comment and what won't.
> 
> > 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.
> 
> 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.
> 
> > I do not create changelists until the code is reviewed, it reduces
> > pilot error by checking in the wrong code.
> 
> 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.
> 
> 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.
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Andy Sharp 
> > Sent: Monday, September 08, 2008 10:29 AM
> > To: Jonathan Goldick
> > Subject: Re: I really need you two to get the code review done.
> > 
> > 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.
> > 
> > On Mon, 8 Sep 2008 09:06:59 -0700 "Jonathan Goldick"
> > <jonathan.goldick@onstor.com> wrote:
> > 
> > > I did reply back that evening.  There is no changelist #.  I sent
> > > you paths and a P4CLIENT, why isn't that enough?
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: Andy Sharp 
> > > Sent: Monday, September 08, 2008 9:05 AM
> > > To: Jonathan Goldick
> > > Subject: Re: I really need you two to get the code review done.
> > > 
> > > On Sun, 7 Sep 2008 17:40:58 -0700 "Jonathan Goldick"
> > > <jonathan.goldick@onstor.com> wrote:
> > > 
> > > > 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.
> > > > 
> > > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > I sent you an email asking for the changelist number but didn't
> > > hear back.
