Hi Paul,
I agree the more review the better, so it is good for engineering to
review bug fixes when there is time. But when there
is short of time, I feel we should let developer spend the time on the
first round of doc review. That will help to eliminate
the bugs logged by SQE. It is very expensive to log bug, fix bug,
verify bug. Remember in one of the admin iteam
meeting, we all agreed it is a good idea to have engineering to give the
first round of manpage review, then SQE can
do the final review and log bugs during this final review, but later on
after doc team checked in manpage, there was no
time left to do this kind two round of review.
It is good that we started this communication. Looks we need to discuss
this process further in our next Admin iteam meeting.
Rajeshwar, would you please add this into the meeting agenda. Thanks.
Thanks,
Judy
Paul Davies wrote:
> JHi Judy,
>
> I'm not sue that I understand your suggestion. My follow-up questions
> are inline.
>
>> (1) "any bug fixes should be initially reviewed by the submitter",
>> that is good. In this case, those bugs opened by SQE will be
>> verified at the same time when SQE do the testing. Since most doc bugs
>> I think are opened by SQE, so we are kind already
>> do the way as you suggested.
>
>
> Should the bug submitter review the fix before the fix is delivered to
> SQE for formal testing and verification? For example, if a writer
> fixes a bundled doc, such as a man page, should the writer submit the
> man page for review before checking the fixed version in the build?
>
>>
>> (2) "any bug fixes should be initially reviewed by the engineering
>> SME", the time would be better spent for engineering to
>> give the first round of review. Review each doc bug could be time
>> consuming.
>
>
> Given that most of the docs against which bugs are submitted have
> already beeb reviewed by engineering, when should the engineering SME
> review the fix? Before the fix is verified by SQE, or at the same time?
>
> Also, are you suggesting that fixes to individual bugs *not* be
> reviewed by engineering after the writer fixes the bug? I would be
> very uneasy about not giving engineering the opportunity to verify
> that the fix is correct.
>
> Thanks!