+1 On Sep 25, 2013, at 23:34 , Dirkjan Ochtman <dirk...@ochtman.nl> wrote:
> On Wed, Sep 25, 2013 at 9:04 PM, Dave Cottlehuber <d...@jsonified.com> wrote: >> Would there be any objections to pushing minor doc fixes & additions >> directly to master? > > No! In fact, I was doing that already even before 1.3.1 came out, I think. > >> The quicker we can get updates out into docs.couchdb.org, the better. >> >> To be clear, I'm not suggesting that major changes like Alex's branch should >> just go straight in. > > We talked about this in IRC today, but I'll reiterate here for those > who missed that: I think Alex's work on the docs branch is awesome, > but I feel like the branch has dragged on for way too long. This means > uncounted users have gotten worse documentation than they could have > gotten, because we were still tweaking some little thing or not quite > satisfied with the language somewhere. While this kind of thing can be > unavoidable with code, where there's much more complexity to deal > with, documentation isn't like that, and we shouldn't treat it like > that. Documentation patches should go straight to master or on very > short-lived feature branches. > > Cheers, > > Dirkjan
signature.asc
Description: Message signed with OpenPGP using GPGMail
