Daniel John Debrunner wrote: > Jean T. Anderson wrote: > >>It might be helpful for reviewers to clearly separate "must fix" items >>from "nice to have" items in their comments. > > Sounds great, but what is a must fix?
A simple definition could be anything that would prevent it from being committed. If a committer doesn't have confidence in a change introduced by the patch, then it should *not* be committed. To take a concrete example ..... I won't commit a doc patch unless: - Somebody indicates the changes are technically ok. - The DITA doc build succeeds. But if something isn't worded quite the way I would personally word it, I leave it be -- there's lots of room for style in documentation. Small improvements that advance the info further are good and others can take it even further. -jean
