OpenG Community Reviews Model

[jgcode]

Howdy!

I am trialing a new model of review for OpenG VIs.

I want to enlist the help of the entire LAVA community.

If the VI under review is one that you use in your projects, interests you, or you just have a moment free whilst hanging out on LAVA (I mean, where else would you rather be, right?), then please check it out and leave your feedback.

The aim is - to steal a line from Christina - to get more eyes on the VIs

I am hoping this will lessen the load on individual reviewers whilst increasing the quality of the changes (or proposed changes).

This model is based on the assumption that there are a lot of Community folk who would like to contribute to OpenG but don't have the time to commit on a regular basis.

The reviews posted may be in the form of specs or actual VIs etc...

Feel free to leave your feedback in the form of comments, documents, code (changes, tests) or whatever makes sense!

You can get started by checking out the newly proposed Trim Whitespace VI code.

The LabVIEW community appreciates your time.

Kind regards

Jonathon Green

OpenG Developer

PS - Of course, if you are interested in contributing more to OpenG, please PM me!

[Black Pearl]

At first thank you for supporting OpenG.

I'm stuck with old 7.1 so my question, if it's posssible to get the code downgraded? I promise to do testing and to ask for an upgrade as well.

Felix

[jgcode]

At first thank you for supporting OpenG.

You are welcome my friend.

I'm stuck with old 7.1 so my question, if it's posssible to get the code downgraded? I promise to do testing and to ask for an upgrade as well

OpenG's direction is definitely a forward one.

Currently the 4.0 release is in LabVIEW 2009.

The cool thing about packages is that you can always install an older version. Unfortunately new updates in later versions would not be available (obviously).

We would love to have you on board if the above works for you (be that now or in the future).

[Jim Kring]

@Jon: This is a great plan. I think that breaking things out into separate review threads/topics for each proposed change will let people contribute as they have time. Also, if people make a significant contribution, we should be sure to include them in the copyright notice, so they receive credit for helping. Another thought is that it would be helpful if the original post gets updated with status and decisions, so that people know what stage in the process things are at. For example, after the review process is over, it should be obvious that that review/comments period for a given proposal has ended.

[jgcode]

Also, if people make a significant contribution, we should be sure to include them in the copyright notice, so they receive credit for helping.

Will do.

Another thought is that it would be helpful if the original post gets updated with status and decisions, so that people know what stage in the process things are at. For example, after the review process is over, it should be obvious that that review/comments period for a given proposal has ended.

Done!

I have added a Status to the top of the post.

When the review is final, I will create a summary post and add a link in the OP under the Status.

I will then lock the topic so there are no more posts, forming an archive for the review.

As this change will be submitted (and consequently published as a package), any further discussion of the VI would warrant a new review for new changes.

[Michael Aivaliotis]

One thing you can do is come up with defined status labels. For example:

Under Review

Review Ended

etc.

Then you can put these as tags in the OP. Then you can use that tag as a prefix. Tagging is a new LAVA feature BTW.

[jgcode]

Tagging is a new LAVA feature BTW.

I am very happy you activated this - I love it!