[pm-h] May Houston.pm meeting

[G. Wade Johnson]

The code review session sounds like an interesting new thing to try. In
order to make this work, we'll need to have 2-3 modules that people are
willing to have reviewed.

Jim has volunteered some code. Anyone else?

We also need to set some ground rules about the kind of review we are
going for.

- Level of pickiness
   - Style issues?
   - Bugs only
   - Maintainability
- Security?
- Architectural improvements?

I'd also suggest that people carefully think in terms of three
different kinds of comments:

  - Question
    - Looking for clarification
    - Might suggest minor change or documentation for clarity
  - Comment
    - Non-fatal issue that might be worth changing or considering
  - Flaw
    - Bug
    - Logic error

Obviously, we have no way of enforcing changes. And, we want to all
remain friendly after the fact. We are just looking for good quality
code in the end.

Does this sound like an approach that everyone can agree to?

G. Wade
-- 
Uncertainty is an uncomfortable position. But certainty is an absurd
one. -- Voltaire