Quote:
|
Originally Posted by futureal
Kura: I guess what you are saying is a bit different than what others had said earlier in the thread. Having a simple Yes/No Approved seems like a better idea to me than a percent-based rating. Either it meets the standards or it doesn't.
As far as public comments, I still agree that the Quality Assurance team should communicate with the author in private.
This whole system sounds like a nice idea for the end user, but risks making it more complicated and less friendly to the hacker. Part of what I like about vb.org is that there are tons of different ideas implemented in tons of different ways here, and anybody is free to do it. I wouldn't want to see this system "crowding out" some of the guys who come in just to write one hack here or there.
This is a good idea, it just needs careful implementation.
|
I agree with the QA team discussing any issue with the author in private. People take comments the wrong the way at times. Maybe a standardized form should be filled out by the QA team and sent to author with basic comments and if the author has questions or simply disagrees with what the QA team "thinks" is the correct way to script something, the issue would be better handled in private. The less public arguements between hack authors and a QA team the better, imo for this site and people( end users) in general.
10-30-2003, 01:02 AM
Hybrid Mode
