I'm still good with commit-then-review for the website, although we have slowly moved towards more reviews of code over time as the project has grown.
On Thu, Jan 16, 2014 at 1:05 AM, Gabriel Reid <[email protected]>wrote: > Hi Josh (and others), > > I was wondering if you had any preferences on how we go about handling > changes to the User Guide (and website content in general). Is there a > preference to go with a review-then-commit workflow, or > commit-then-review (or something else)? > > I'm assuming that at this point that there won't be any huge major > additions to it, but I figure it wouldn't be bad to have a general > agreement on how we want to handle editing it. FWIW, up until now the > (very minor) changes I've made have just been going straight in > without any review. > > - Gabriel > -- Director of Data Science Cloudera <http://www.cloudera.com> Twitter: @josh_wills <http://twitter.com/josh_wills>
