Source Code Review Form 
=======================
(version 1.3)

Date: 2007-04-18

1 Identification
GH-2007-04-18-0  Bugfix:  Wrong path to spooled parallel jobs with using classic spooling
                 Bugtraq: 6461308
                 Review:  AH


2 Conforms to specification

2 [ ] yes
2 [x] no - comment: This change is not covered by any specification.


3 Documentation

3.1 user/admin guide OK, or doc CR filed?
3.1 [x] yes
3.1 [ ] no - comment:

3.2 man pages (user view) correct?
3.2 [x] yes
3.2 [ ] no - comment:

3.3 -help output correct and complete?
3.3 [x] yes
3.3 [ ] no - comment:

3.4 documented interfaces (at least GDI, EVI, libs, ADOC format) correct, updated?
3.4 [x] yes
3.4 [ ] no - comment:

3.5 messages, output formats and defines OK?
3.5 [x] yes
3.5 [ ] no - comment:

3.6 Bugster CR complete and correct?
3.6 [x] yes
3.6 [ ] no - comment:

3.7 Issuezilla entry (if exists) complete and correct?
3.7 [X] yes
3.7 [ ] no - comment:


4 Source review

4.1 Style guide conformance
4.1 [x] yes
4.1 [ ] no - comment:

4.2 Memory leaks
4.2 [x] yes
4.2 [ ] no - comment:

4.3 Thread safe
4.3 [x] yes
4.3 [ ] no


5 Tests

5.1 Used memory leak debugger
5.1 [ ] yes
5.1 [x] no - comment: this bug fix does not allocate any dynamic memory

5.2 Manual tests
Description: The problem can be reproduced with a HPC example program.
             I also used this program to verify the fix.
             
Successfull execution
5.2 [x] yes
5.2 [ ] no - comment:

5.3 Testsuite covers issue
5.3 [ ] yes
5.3 [X] no - comment: I had to modify an existing test. See comment section.

5.4 If 5.3 = no: New testsuite test or module test created?
5.4 [X] yes, path: checktree/functional/tight_integration
5.4 [ ] no - justification:

5.5 If 5.4 = no: Testsuite issue created?
5.5 [ ] yes, id: 
5.5 [ ] no - justification:

5.6 Testsuite run successfull
5.6 [x] yes
5.6 [ ] no - comment:


6 Comments

(i) Created IZ 2154 to keep track of the changes to the existing check.
    The modifications are basically (i) evaluation of qmaster messeages
    and (ii) blanking out messages due to fault injection. Code review
    for the test was performed by Joachim Gabler.

7 Accepted
7 [x] yes
7 [ ] no - comment:


