Re-review RC-001 to RC-003 against the framework checklists
Fix the defects found (cost-benefit justification, delivery-time constraint, spelled-out abbreviations) and add review records RC-005 to RC-007 for the Business Case, Stakeholder Analysis and milestone MIL-001, all with verdict Go.
This commit is contained in:
@@ -11,7 +11,8 @@
|
||||
## Version History
|
||||
| Date | Status | Author | Reviewer | Change | Commit |
|
||||
| --- | --- | --- | --- | --- | --- |
|
||||
| 2026-10-07 | Accepted | Jens Tirsvad Nielsen | S01 | Initial version | [c55db0e] |
|
||||
| 2026-10-07 | Deprecated | Jens Tirsvad Nielsen | S01 | Initial version | [c55db0e] |
|
||||
| 2026-10-07 | Accepted | Jens Tirsvad Nielsen | S01 | Re-review fixes: cite the Business Case delivery-time constraint, spell out RC | pending |
|
||||
|
||||
---
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -32,7 +33,7 @@ A Python 3.13+ project with `src/`, `tests/`, `docs/`, `pyproject.toml`, `consta
|
||||
| 3 | The README follows the template and its steps work | Each section is filled and the steps run | A section is missing or a step fails |
|
||||
| 4 | Runtime dependencies | Only PrettyTable | Any other runtime dependency |
|
||||
| 5 | Repository description and at least 3 topics are set | Visible on the repository page | Missing |
|
||||
| 6 | Code review record against `qc-programming-python` | `RC-*` says Go | No review or No-Go |
|
||||
| 6 | Code review record against `qc-programming-python` | The review record (`RC-*`) says Go | No review or No-Go |
|
||||
|
||||
## Dependencies
|
||||
|
||||
@@ -59,7 +60,7 @@ A Python 3.13+ project with `src/`, `tests/`, `docs/`, `pyproject.toml`, `consta
|
||||
|
||||
## Target Date
|
||||
|
||||
2026-10-14 — one week from the start, consistent with the Business Case's small scope.
|
||||
2026-10-14 — one week from the start, as the Business Case constraint on delivery time requires.
|
||||
|
||||
## Tasks
|
||||
|
||||
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user