[TYPO3-core] RFC: adminpanel and caching problems

[rupert germann]

Hi Ingmar,

I absolutely agree that a small comment to each +1 should be mandatory.

greets
rupert

On Monday 17 April 2006 18:47, Ingmar Schlecht wrote:
> Martin Kutschker wrote:
> > Ingmar Schlecht <ingmar at typo3.org> writes on
> >
> > Mon, 17 Apr 2006 15:43:37 +0200 (METDST):
> >> I haven't tested it, but the patch looks good.
> >
> > Considering that we have had quite a number of follow-up
> > patches we shouldn't +1 untested patches.
>
> Good point, so I reject my approval for now.
>
> Apart from that, I think we should extend the rules of this list so
> every +1 *must* be explained.
>
> Good:
> 	-------------------
> 	+1
> 	I didn't test the patch but it's so trivial that you can commit
> 	it right away.
> 	-------------------
>
> 	-------------------
> 	+1
> 	I tested it in both Frontend and Backend and it works perfectly.
> 	-------------------
>
> Bad:
> 	-------------------
> 	+1
> 	-------------------
>
> I don't like all those uncommented +1s in this list, becuase I don't
> know what thoughts / tests the +1 is based on.
>
> cheers
> Ingmar
> _______________________________________________
> TYPO3-team-core mailing list
> TYPO3-team-core at lists.netfielders.de
> http://lists.netfielders.de/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/typo3-team-core
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.netfielders.de/pipermail/typo3-team-core/attachments/20060418/9b895c94/attachment.pgp