Dear Dave Thanks very much for moving this forward. I think it's almost there. When agreed, this will be a change to the governance rules on the website, so it really belongs in that repository, but never mind!
* General guidelines 1. "This is so it is easy to trace the discussion what" should be "that". * General guidelines 3. Would it be OK to state (in view of 1) that there should always be an issue for a defect or an enhancement? * General guidelines 4. "Please attempt to present contributions as enhancements, defects, or typos." Can't we insist on this? Are there other possibilities? Different rules apply, so one must be clear which kind is intended. * Typo fix. No need for an issue because these won't be mentioned in the history. That might be worth saying. * Single section change. "If the modification is non-controversial (especially likely for a defect issue)". * Multiple section. "should follow the patter". -n needed. Could add to this point that rich-diff is a very useful way to see what's proposed to be changed! Best wishes Jonathan -- You are receiving this because you commented. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/cf-convention/cf-conventions/issues/130#issuecomment-407116258
