Some recent changes made to some base classes makes it clear we need a better notification and communication among developers. It also point to a need for more testing programs before code are checked back into CVS. Rather than going into the specific example we should follow the following overall rules. -- All changes should be documented in the code in two different ways. a) The cvs log comment should be meaning full. This may require that checkin is done at a sublevel and not at once. b) The code should have comments given the history of changes in some more detail put in the top of the .cxx code just before the first include files . with date/name/changes. e.g. // December 1999. Modified code to deal with the TPC raw data as defined by KO // in the Dec 10 document. // // May 18, 2000, FV // Moved dealing with RICH detector from FFS section to // BFS part. as inserted today in BrRawDataInput.cxx c) comment should NOT be dispersed into the text. -- A message should be send to the brahms-dev-l@bnl.gov listserver indicating at a minimum what directories have been modified, preferentially what files , and some overall commenst on what was done. -- For changes to be made in more fundamental classes e.g.(at the time being) base, raw, db, geant, geometry,. the core developers should be contacted before committing to CVS. -- If you want to make changes to a directory for which the main responsibility is another detector (group/person) it would good to discuss such changes, unless they are purely cosmetic. -- For changes to Tracking / Tpc stuff consult/discuss with the larger group of tracking people (using the dev-l listserver. best regards Flemming
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu May 18 2000 - 16:20:17 EDT