July 20, 2005 8:54 PM

CWS: Good description is really important!

One of the problems we still see in our cws development model is wrong or completely missing description of child workspaces. People reading cws-announce mailing-list will actually read the description of your child workspace, so please keep it informative and fill it at all!

Very good example is kendy's child workspace iconswitching1. It contains full description of the work that will be in his child workspace. It can even attract people to test it and thus help kendy with its debugging!

Not that bad (but could be better) example is child workspace swqbf39. Its description references issues being fixed ("fixes for issue i51733 and i52225") in this cws. This is redundant information, because these issues will surely be assigned to this child workspace and you still do not know what this cws is all about and have to open IZ and read the summary of both issues. But it at least contains some description.

The very bad example is hsqldb6. It is a really small child workspace (already integrated, BTW) and its description is empty. I understand that it was quick cws, but it should have non-empty description!

All child workspaces were chosen randomly. The only exception being kendy's iconswitching1 because I took inspiration from its description (but I believe there are other good examples as well). I know that the chosen child workspaces are not very good candidates, because new feature developed in iconswitching1 surely needs better description than small bugfix cws hsqldb6, but think about the principles instead of details... -----

Posted by Pavel | Permanent link | File under: OpenOffice.org