Dear all As David H says, I think we should first decide the procedure for making decisions on changes using GitHub (as an alternative to Trac). This will be part of a modified version of http://cfconventions.org/rules.html, so at this point we need explicit text to put in that document. In principle it should be the same procedure as now regarding the time-limits etc.
One change in the procedure could be to recognise an extra kind of change request i.e. typo, which is different from defect or enhancement. A defect is a proposal to change the words of the document to correct an error or clarify them, with materially changing the meaning of it. Someone else might disagree with the proposer of a defect ticket and think what they propose is actually a material change to the meaning, and in that case the proposal has to be discussed as an enhancement instead i.e. not accepted by default. A typo is an even more minor change which fixes something that seems evidently to be simply a mistake. However it's possible, in an analogous way, that someone else might say that it's not a typo, but deliberate, in which case it'd have to be discussed as a defect or enhancement instead. I think that a typo could be proposed with a pull request, but a defect or an enhancement should be started with an issue, as David H says, and proceed to a pull request when it's fairly well agreed and it comes to a matter of wording. Cheers Jonathan -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/cf-convention/cf-conventions/issues/130#issuecomment-399946778
