Changes between Version 8 and Version 9 of Developers/DevProcess
- Timestamp:
- 2016-02-02T07:31:00+01:00 (8 years ago)
Legend:
- Unmodified
- Added
- Removed
- Modified
-
Developers/DevProcess
v8 v9 52 52 || Detailed results of restartability and reproducibility when the option is activated. Please indicate the configuration used for this test || || || 53 53 || Detailed results of SETTE tests (restartability and reproducibility for each of the reference configuration) || || || 54 || I || || YES/NO||55 || If no, is reason for the change valid/understood? || || YES/NO/NA||56 || If no, ensure that the ticket details the impact this change will have on model configurations . || || YES/NO/NA||57 || Is this change expected to preserve all diagnostics? || || YES/NO||58 || If no, is reason for the change valid/understood? || || YES/NO/NA||59 || Are there significant changes in run time/memory? || || YES/NO||54 || Results of the required bit comparability tests been run: Are there no differences when activating the development? || || || 55 || If some differences appear, is reason for the change valid/understood? || || || 56 || If some differences appear, is the ticket describing in detail the impact this change will have on model configurations? || || || 57 || Is this change expected to preserve all diagnostics? || || || 58 || If no, is reason for the change valid/understood? || || || 59 || Are there significant changes in run time/memory? || || || 60 60 61 61 === Code changes and documentation === … … 70 70 || Is there a need for some documentation on the web pages (in addition to in-line and reference manual)?[[BR]]If yes, please describe and ask PI. A yes answer must include all documentation available. || || YES/NO || 71 71 72 === Testing === 73 || Question || Discussion || Answer || 74 || Has the NVTK and other jobs been tested with this change? || || YES/NO || 75 || Have the required bit comparability tests been run? || || YES/NO || 76 || Can this change be shown to have a null impact? (if option not selected) || || YES/NO || 77 || If no, is reason for the change valid/understood? || || YES/NO/NA || 78 || If no, ensure that the ticket details the impact this change will have on model configurations . || || YES/NO/NA || 79 || Is this change expected to preserve all diagnostics? || || YES/NO || 80 || If no, is reason for the change valid/understood? || || YES/NO/NA || 81 || Are there significant changes in run time/memory? || || YES/NO || 72 === Review Summary === 73 Is the review fully sucessful? 82 74 83 Testing Comments 75 If not, please indicate date and whta is still missing? 84 76 85 Add specific testing comments here 86 87 Add specific testing comments here 88 89 === Code Review === 90 || Do the code changes comply with NEMO coding standards? || YES/NO || 91 || Are code changes consistent with the design of NEMO? || YES/NO || 92 || Is the code free of unwanted TABs? || YES/NO || 93 || Has the code been wholly (100%) produced by NEMO developers working on NEMO? || YES/NO || 94 || If no, ensure collaboration agreement has been added to the ticket keywords || 95 96 Add specific code comments or suggested alterations here. 97 98 === Review Summary === 99 Add summary here 100 101 === Approval for the trunk === 102 YES/NO 103 104 The code reviewer may approve the change for the NEMO trunk when: 105 106 1. their requests/comments have been addressed satisfactorily. 107 1. the above check-list has been completed. 108 109 or the code reviewer may choose to reject & assign the change back to the code author. 77 Once review is sucessful, the of end of review should be added in table at top of the page, and the development must be scheduled for merge during next Merge Party Meeting.