First to come to mind is task copy_col_to_tab, where nine out of ten times I turn off the check box "Primary key". Task copy_project_vrs uses a default project version increment of 0.10, that is not used in any of the projects I have encountered. Using the same increase as was used last time (in case of numeric version names) would be great. All of those are minor usability issues for me, maybe not even perceived as such by the majority of users. Implement at your leisure :-)
Great! It's almost a screenshot of my mock-up, no complaints here :-)
I would vote for more control over graphs in general!
"Ready for review" means: "I, as a developer, am positive this code contains no errors and can be deployed safely". As long as that is not the case, should that version of the template be merged, or do you want to revert to the previous (reviewed) version? A practical workaround can be to turn the statement around: "This code is being used in production, sure it is ready for review". That allows you to bulk set all control procedures to "Ready for review" at the start of a branch, with an appropriate change log description. It does mean that some old code will never get reviewed until there is a new modification of the control procedure or until those control procedures with that description are demoted to a development status.
Already have an account? Login
Enter your username or e-mail address. We'll send you an e-mail with instructions to reset your password.
Sorry, we're still checking this file's contents to make sure it's safe to download. Please try again in a few minutes.
Sorry, our virus scanner detected that this file isn't safe to download.