Open Stack

On 02/26/2015 06:47 AM, Lucas Alvares Gomes wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> I never had a strong opinion on this but reading what Jay said makes
> sense to me. I also like Robert suggestion about having a single +2/+A
> for such small changes.

+A

> 
> Cheers,
> Lucas
> 
> On Wed, Feb 25, 2015 at 11:22 PM, Robert Collins
> <robertc at robertcollins.net> wrote:
>> On 26 February 2015 at 05:26, Ruby Loo <rlooyahoo at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> I was wondering what people thought about patches that only fix grammatical
>>> issues or misspellings in comments in our code.
>>>
>>> I can't believe I'm sending out this email, but as a group, I'd like it if
>>> we had  a similar understanding so that we treat all patches in a similar
>>> (dare I say it, consistent) manner. I've seen negative votes and positive
>>> (approved) votes for similar patches. Right now, I look at such submitted
>>> patches and ignore them, because I don't know what the fairest thing is. I
>>> don't feel right that a patch that was previously submitted gets a -2,
>>> whereas another patch gets a +A.
>>>
>>> To be clear, I think that anything that is user-facing like (log, exception)
>>> messages or our documentation should be cleaned up. (And yes, I am fine
>>> using British or American English or a mix here.)
>>>
>>> What I'm wondering about are the fixes to docstrings and inline comments
>>> that aren't externally visible.
>>>
>>> On one hand, It is great that someone submits a patch so maybe we should
>>> approve it, so as not to discourage the submitter. On the other hand, how
>>> useful are such submissions. It has already been suggested (and maybe
>>> discussed to death) that we should approve patches if there are only nits.
>>> These grammatical and misspellings fall under nits. If we are explicitly
>>> saying that it is OK to merge these nits, then why fix them later, unless
>>> they are part of a patch that does more than only address those nits?
>>>
>>> I realize that it would take me less time to approve the patches than to
>>> write this email, but I wanted to know what the community thought. Some
>>> rule-of-thumb would be helpful to me.
>>>
>>> Thoughts?
>>
>> I think improvements are improvements and we should welcome them - and
>> allow single +2/+A so long as they are not touching code.
>>
>> -Rob
>>
>>
>> --
>> Robert Collins <rbtcollins at hp.com>
>> Distinguished Technologist
>> HP Converged Cloud
>>
>> __________________________________________________________________________
>> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
>> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
>> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> 
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
> 


-- 
Sean Dague
http://dague.net