[Serusers] Re: [Serdev] rel_0_9_0 release critical bugs/missing things

[Greger V. Teigre]

I agree with Juha.  I would even take it further: No commit should be done 
without referencing the corresponding issue the commit is related to, i.e. 
issues should drive development, not the individual developer's to-do list.
   Without these two rules, we have no transparancy on what is going in 
development (or as today: the maintainer's head) and no transparancy on what 
did go in development (or today: no documentation).

These are just natural consequences when a project has multiple developers. 
Also, this will help out in communication across developers.
g-)

Juha Heinanen wrote:
> Jan Janak writes:
>
>>   Are you suggesting that commits should be rejected if they do not
>>   update documentation as well ? What is better, having undocumented
>>   code or having no code ?
>
> yes, i'm suggesting that no commit should be accepted without
> corresponding documentation.  otherwise the new features become
> secrets of the chosen few who have read the code and understand how
> to use them.  the rest will fill the mailing list with questions.
>
> -- juha