Open Stack

On Mon, Feb 23, 2015 at 10:18 AM, Nick Chase <nchase at mirantis.com> wrote:

>
> Summarizing people's comments in one message, but if nothing else please
> skip to the bottom (it's important):
>
>  Though I do understand push back to fix larger standards transgressions,
>> for example some while ago I had a larger section I submitted with lots of
>> examples where the spacing the the <screen> sections were all wrong so
>> pointing out the error in the first one and saying "please check and fix
>> the others" was completely appropriate.
>>
>
> For something like that, I completely agree; I mean, that's not what I
> consider a "minor cosmetic issue".
>
>  I tend to agree with Andreas that merging the change and oepning another
>> bug for style/syntax is likely to accumulate debt, unless we get an influx
>> of pre-summit people looking for cheap commits to get ATC badges.
>>
>
> I don't see this as a problem.  As I said, we NEED a pool of these for
> first time contributors.  If nothing else, these are the things that are
> reeeeeally easy for someone to knock off in an afternoon if they get out of
> control.  (If necessary to move things forward, I will volunteer.)
>
>  For my part I tend to scan bugs when I have time (infrequently) for
>> things that I have technical experience in actually doing, grammar isn't
>> going to catch my interest.
>>
>
> No, but there are lots of writers who don't have the technical experience
> in a lot of what we do, but grammar they can handle.
>
>  But we have to tell a contributor about our conventions to have high
>> quality standards - and I agree that we should do this in a nice way.
>>
> Agreed.  But we can do that with (as Diane suggested) a non-voting
> comment, which can ask them to open a second bug if they can't get to it to
> fix it.  And even if they don't, if this is something that's truly a
> problem (rather than an irritation) somebody will open another bug.
>
>  Which patch is triggering that that has so important information in it
>> that it needs to go out half way?
>>
>
> This didn't come from a specific patch, but more of a general experience.
> (This was more of a "That's it, I've got to say something," kind of thing.
> :))
>
> I'm not looking to completely dismantle the way we ensure quality, and I
> don't think that this will do that.  I'm simply looking to create a
> friendlier environment for contributors as we attempt to broaden our base.
>
> PLEASE READ THIS:  The reality is that I have had multiple people tell me
> that they either dread submitting patches, or have stopped contributing
> altogether because it's such an unpleasant experience. We need to take this
> seriously and see what we can do to solve the problem.
>
> If we find that making a policy like this causes more harm than good, we
> can always change it back later.
>
>
Thanks for bringing it up. We do have guidelines here:
https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Documentation/ReviewGuidelines so feel free
to enhance those to help solve the problem.

All our reviews are a judgement call and I'd like us all (core, regulars,
everyone) to be mindful and show good judgement.

Thanks,
Anne


> ----  Nick
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OpenStack-docs mailing list
> OpenStack-docs at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-docs
>



-- 
Anne Gentle
annegentle at justwriteclick.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-docs/attachments/20150223/abc4eb31/attachment.html>