Timeline for Prepare source code handover plan
Current License: CC BY-SA 3.0
10 events
| when toggle format | what | by | license | comment | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Feb 24, 2012 at 13:27 | comment | added | BЈовић | @S.Lott Ok makes sense. Now that I think of it, I was in similar situation before, where they made us implement something on broken HW boards. We spent good 4 months before figuring out what is really wrong. | |
| Feb 24, 2012 at 13:26 | history | edited | BЈовић | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 65 characters in body
|
| Feb 24, 2012 at 12:57 | comment | added | S.Lott | A claim that the code builds is not the same as actually seeing the code get built. Been there. Done that. The documentation can be vague, or confusing or incomplete. It's the old "Trust but Verify" principle. Until you see it, don't believe it. | |
| Feb 24, 2012 at 12:56 | comment | added | BЈовић | @S.Lott Whether they show, or write in a document, it shouldn't matter. Ahmed Aswani and his team are going to maintain the application, and should be able to do all the step above on their own. I modified the answer a bit, but I am not sure if that is what you suggested. | |
| Feb 24, 2012 at 12:53 | history | edited | BЈовић | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 17 characters in body
|
| Feb 24, 2012 at 12:39 | comment | added | S.Lott | I would suggest that these be modified to have the words "You must see them..." e.g., "You must see them build the code" and "You must see them run the unit tests", etc. Evidence is important here. | |
| S Feb 24, 2012 at 12:16 | history | suggested | CommunityBot | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
Added note on installation instructions
|
| Feb 24, 2012 at 12:15 | review | Suggested edits | |||
| S Feb 24, 2012 at 12:16 | |||||
| Feb 24, 2012 at 8:44 | history | edited | BЈовић | CC BY-SA 3.0 |
added 114 characters in body
|
| Feb 24, 2012 at 7:53 | history | answered | BЈовић | CC BY-SA 3.0 |