[Insight-developers] Gerrit Reviewers : Still Looking for more.

[Luis Ibanez]

Cory,

I'm 50/50 here...


I see pros and cons in both formats.


Dan:

      Would you like to argue in
      favor of the Table format ?


We could certainly have the table, but sorted
by interest and expertise, instead of sorted by
reviewer... (just another idea...).


    Luis


------------------------------------------------------------------
On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 10:05 AM, Cory Quammen <cquammen at cs.unc.edu> wrote:

> Luis,
>
> I actually started from Dan's changes. I changed from the table format
> to headings and subheadings to get the nice table of contents at the
> top of the page, which I think is a nice feature to quickly jump to
> the set of qualified reviewers. The table is fairly compact, though,
> so I guess it is not that useful to have the table of contents.
>
> Since I was the one who messed up the table in the first place, I can
> restore it. I'll wait for your consent before editing the page,
> though, so we don't have conflicting changes.
>
> Thanks,
> Cory
>
> On Thu, Oct 14, 2010 at 9:48 AM, Luis Ibanez <luis.ibanez at kitware.com>
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Dan,
> >
> > Thanks for creating the table, That's great !
> >
> >
> > Unfortunately, there was an editing conflict, and the
> > table was overridden by subsequent changes, so
> > I'll give it a shot at restoring it, and making the union
> > with the changes that Cory added (for organizing
> > reviewers by areas of expertise and interest, which
> > is also a very useful change).
> >
> > I hoping to get this done by noon (Eastern time).
> >
> >
> >    Thanks
> >
> >
> >         Luis
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------
> > On Wed, Oct 13, 2010 at 11:08 PM, Dan Mueller <dan.muel at gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> >> Hi Luis,
> >>
> >> I found the wiki page a little hard to read, so I refactored using a
> >> table. Hope that is ok...
> >>
> >> Cheers, Dan
> >>
> >> On 13 October 2010 23:27, Luis Ibanez <luis.ibanez at kitware.com> wrote:
> >> >
> >> > Thanks to all of you who volunteered to help
> >> > with the review process.
> >> >
> >> > The current list of reviewers has been posted
> >> > in the Wiki at:
> >> >
> >> > http://www.itk.org/Wiki/ITK/Gerrit/Reviewers
> >> >
> >> > The section of reviewer's "expertise / interest"
> >> > is currently empty. It is probably better if every
> >> > reviewer put some entries under her/his name:
> >> >
> >> > http://www.itk.org/Wiki/ITK/Gerrit/Reviewers#Expertise_.2F_Interests
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > --
> >> >
> >> > We are still in need of 5 to 10 more reviewers.
> >> >
> >> > This is critical to ensure that the incoming code
> >> > gets to be checked by many eyes, and that we
> >> > all engage in the process of eliminating potential
> >> > incoming bugs.
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > This is direct application of Rule #2 of Open Source:
> >> >
> >> >   "Given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow"
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >
> >> > Please let us know if you want to participate,
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >       Thanks
> >> >
> >> >
> >> >             Luis
> >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Cory Quammen
> Computer Integrated Systems for Microscopy and Manipulation (CISMM)
> Department of Computer Science
> University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill
> http://www.cs.unc.edu/~cquammen <http://www.cs.unc.edu/%7Ecquammen>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.itk.org/mailman/private/insight-developers/attachments/20101014/f61d735c/attachment.htm>