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

[Dan Mueller]

The current format (a list) is fine.

On 14 October 2010 18:40, Luis Ibanez <luis.ibanez at kitware.com> wrote:
>
> 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
>
>