Open Stack

I think this is not only for code but also for doc and reno. We should
fix it basically, especially about doc/reno. But I don't think it
should be in the same patch if the mistake isn't critical which means
*nitpicks*. I think we can fix them with following patches if we need
to fix it.

Otherwise, writing reno/doc might be a really difficult and hard work
for ESL people like me.

-- Masayuki


On 05/30, Ghanshyam Mann wrote:
> Thanks for making it formal process which really helps. I think most
> of the people usually does that but yes it is always helpful to be
> added as principles.
> 
> I have gotten mix feedback on fixing other patches in past and when i
> got anger by author i try to leave comment for a day or two then fix
> if it is really needed otherwise just go with follow-up.
> 
> One question - This only applies to code nitpick only right? not
> documentation or releasenotes. For doc and reno, we should fix spell
> or grammar mistake etc in same patch.
> 
> -gmann
> 
> 
> On Tue, May 29, 2018 at 10:55 PM, Julia Kreger
> <juliaashleykreger at gmail.com> wrote:
> > During the Forum, the topic of review culture came up in session after
> > session. During these discussions, the subject of our use of nitpicks
> > were often raised as a point of contention and frustration, especially
> > by community members that have left the community and that were
> > attempting to re-engage the community. Contributors raised the point
> > of review feedback requiring for extremely precise English, or
> > compliance to a particular core reviewer's style preferences, which
> > may not be the same as another core reviewer.
> >
> > These things are not just frustrating, but also very inhibiting for
> > part time contributors such as students who may also be time limited.
> > Or an operator who noticed something that was clearly a bug and that
> > put forth a very minor fix and doesn't have the time to revise it over
> > and over.
> >
> > While nitpicks do help guide and teach, the consensus seemed to be
> > that we do need to shift the culture a little bit. As such, I've
> > proposed a change to our principles[1] in governance that attempts to
> > capture the essence and spirit of the nitpicking topic as a first
> > step.
> >
> > -Julia
> > ---------
> > [1]: https://review.openstack.org/570940
> >
> > __________________________________________________________________________
> > 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

-- 
Happy Hacking!!
  Masayuki Igawa
  GPG fingerprint = C27C 2F00 3A2A 999A 903A  753D 290F 53ED C899 BF90
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 833 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20180530/5a64f243/attachment.sig>