-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 81
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
150 update implemented metrics readme #435
150 update implemented metrics readme #435
Conversation
This pull request #435 is assigned to @fanifieiev/z, here is why; the budget is 15 minutes, see §4; please, read §27 and when you decide to accept the changes, inform @paulodamaso/z (the architect) right in this ticket; if you decide that this PR should not be accepted ever, also inform the architect; this blog post will help you understand what is expected from a code reviewer; there will be a monetary reward for this job |
@0crat refuse |
@fanifieiev The user @fanifieiev/z resigned from #435, please stop working. Reason for job resignation: Order was cancelled |
@fanifieiev Job refused in 0 hours - no penalty, see §6 |
This pull request #435 is assigned to @Vatavuk/z, here is why; the budget is 15 minutes, see §4; please, read §27 and when you decide to accept the changes, inform @paulodamaso/z (the architect) right in this ticket; if you decide that this PR should not be accepted ever, also inform the architect; this blog post will help you understand what is expected from a code reviewer; there will be a monetary reward for this job |
@paulodamaso should we close #433 ? |
@paulodamaso ping |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@victornoel one comment
README.md
Outdated
@@ -110,84 +110,105 @@ _Revisiting Class Cohesion: An empirical investigation on several systems_,<br/> | |||
Journal of Object Technology, vol.7, no.6, 2008, | |||
[PDF](http://www.jot.fm/issues/issue_2008_07/article1.pdf). | |||
|
|||
Here is a list of metrics we already implement: | |||
### Here is a list of metrics we already implement: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@victornoel I believe it should be we've already implemented
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@Vatavuk both are correct english, but I will change, it is same the for me :)
@Vatavuk thanks, it is done |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@paulodamaso good to merge
@victornoel build is failing (?) please take a look |
@paulodamaso clearly this is not related to the content of this PR, there seem to be an error with the maven build… maybe it is a transient error? Could you try re-trigger the build? |
@rultor merge |
@paulodamaso OK, I'll try to merge now. You can check the progress of the merge here |
@paulodamaso Done! FYI, the full log is here (took me 16min) |
@sereshqua/z please review this job completed by @Vatavuk/z, as in §30; the job will be fully closed and all payments will be made when the quality review is completed |
@Vatavuk please make sure you will find at least 3 issues during next CR; also, keep in mind that these have to be design problems, but not rather cosmetic issues like localisation |
@sereshqua ok |
@0crat quality acceptable |
1 similar comment
@0crat quality acceptable |
@sereshqua actually it worked, it is as @g4s8 said in https://github.com/zerocracy/farm/issues/2252, it should be fixed the next time you get a QA job :) |
@victornoel do you mean QA label or? should NOT we see smth like this already? |
@sereshqua There is no quality review for #435, no performer |
@sereshqua well, not here, because the QA here happened before the fix was merged |
@victornoel look at above, I think now it is working properly :D |
@sereshqua ah yes, very cool :) |
This is for #150
I tracked the references in the tickets where the metrics were introduced, and since some of them had no available pdf on the web, I decided to directly link the pdf in this repository instead.
So I applied the same to all other metrics as well as fixed markdown and other errors.
The README can be seen rendered here: https://github.com/victornoel/jpeek/tree/150-update-implemented-metrics-readme