30 Day Warranty#68
Conversation
cewilliams
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Generally good, thanks for getting this in! Grammar changes are requested. Context and Forces changes are open for discussion.
|
|
||
| # Context | ||
|
|
||
| Teams depends on another team accepting their contributions so that a component |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think this applies whether the contributing team provides the code or not. The end result that the contributing team is trying to achieve is that the feature is available to them to use, whether they, the receiving team, or another party write the code that provides the feature.
| submitted half finished contributions and subsequently filed requests for | ||
| fixes that make it ready for use in production. | ||
| - If code is contributed from outside the team, the team has the natural | ||
| suspicition that the other team does not know how to write code that would |
| codebase. | ||
| - There is the fear of the contributors not being available for support with | ||
| fixing bugs after the time on contribution. | ||
|
|
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Additional forces may be:
- Teams fear contributed code will lead to high(er) maintenance costs but do not know how to control for that
- Receiving teams may fear that teaching others how to contribute code will expose technical debt in their system and that visibility may be damaging
- Receiving teams may not believe that they will get acceptable code no matter how much mentoring they provide
- Either team may not feel confident in measuring risks or certifying that they are mitigated in a contribution
| - the receiving team is willing to accept contributions and able to share the | ||
| workload of initial adaptations/fixes | ||
| - increased transparency and fairness | ||
| - keeps escalations from becoming to heavyweight |
|
|
||
| # Acknowledgement | ||
|
|
||
| - Dirk |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Dirk -> Dirk-Willem van Gulik
|
Thanks for the suggestions and changes, @cewilliams ! @psudars : will you have time to review, as well or would you like me to ask around if s.o. else would like to jump in your stead? |
Updated this pattern to match revised pattern in the PLoP 2017 paper on InnerSource Patterns, meeting reviewer comments.
NewMexicoKid
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This has been reviewed by the PLoP 2017 author team and assigned shepherd from PLoP.
| bug fixes to the receiving team. | ||
|
|
||
| a) clear contribution guidelines spelling out the expectations of the receiving | ||
| team and |
This is the 30 Day Warranty Pattern put in practice by the PayPal folks.