1. +1 2. +1 - Reason and common sense should apply... 3. +1 On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 6:03 PM, Joey McAllister <jmcallis...@pivotal.io> wrote:
> Thanks for kicking this off, Karen! > > 1. +1 - I like the idea of making documentation part of the requirements > for issues that need it. Is it better in these cases to use the primary > ticket or to create a new subticket associated with the primary one? > > 2. +1 - I agree that reviews should be on a case-by-case basis. Since the > community has committers/contributors who specialize in technical > documentation, I'd hope that those docs specialists would make themselves > available for such reviews. And, on the flip side, I'd hope that anyone > focused on adding/editing documentation based on new/changed code would > seek the review of the developer who worked on the code. And, yes > (connected to #3 below), I think small changes might not need reviews at > all. > > 3. +1 > > On Tue, Oct 25, 2016 at 5:47 PM Karen Miller <kmil...@apache.org> wrote: > > > With our documentation now in the same repository as the code, there are > > now > > some doc-related issues that could use some community consensus. Here are > > some of my opinions to start the discussion. > > > > 1. Create new JIRA tickets for each documentation task, or use the > existing > > ticket under > > which the code is committed for the documentation task? > > > > I'd like to see a combination of both, but use the existing ticket > > wherever > > possible. By using the same ticket as the code, the documentation effort > is > > less > > likely to be forgotten. I certainly think that when a new property is > > introduced, > > or a default value is changed, the same ticket can be used. > > > > I think that for large, and new efforts (in the documentation), new > > tickets are the > > way to go. > > > > 2. Do we need a review effort for all documentation tasks? > > > > My opinion: no, not for everything. The bigger the changes, the more > > likely that > > a review is warranted. > > > > 3. Do we need a new JIRA ticket for each very little documentation > change? > > > > On this question, my strong opinion is no, we don't need distinct > JIRAs. > > I'd like to propose that we use a single ticket per release that > > all typo fixes and really small changes are committed under. No > > reviews needed. We won't end up with dozens of tickets, each for a tiny > > change that really needs no community discussion. If the ticket becomes > > abused, > > we can revisit the topic. > > > > I've already created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/GEODE-2036 > > for > > just this purpose, as I have a typo that I want to fix. If no one > objects, > > we can > > use this ticket for all tiny fixes that go with Geode 1.1.0. > > > -- ~/William
