I'd argue that it would be a good opportunity to ensure correctness, as well as proper presentation and readability, of our documentation by reviewing it before it made it's way up to master.
Thanks Justin On Jun 2, 2014, at 11:26 AM, Antranig Basman <[email protected]> wrote: > I think that we had agreed that those with commit access to the documentation > would be able to to push/merge changes without formality. This preserves the > existing semantic that we have for edits made to our old documentation in the > wiki. I believe this is the model Colin is referring to by the "simple and > open process". > > Cheers, > Antranig > > On 02/06/2014 14:05, Justin Obara wrote: >> I agree that the committers for Infusion-Docs should not necessarily be the >> same as those for Infusion. We should probably keep to a similar branch, >> pull request, merge (with logs) workflow. >> >> Thanks >> Justin >> >> On May 30, 2014, at 4:55 PM, Colin Clark <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi Anastasia and all, >>> >>> I think it’s worthwhile to have a lightweight code review process for >>> documentation pull requests. I’ve enjoyed following the way you’ve all been >>> working so far. I think it would be great to ensure a member of our >>> documentation working group reviews pull requests as they come in, and >>> recruit the developers who worked on a particular feature to also lend a >>> hand with the documentation review process. >>> >>> In my opinion, and this is open to debate, the people who can edit and >>> review and push documentation changes to our documentation repo need not be >>> committers to the Infusion repository—we should have a more simple and open >>> process for this. I believe we can create a distinct team in Github to >>> enable more open push access to the repo if we desire. >>> >>> Thoughts? >>> >>> Colin >>> >>> On May 12, 2014, at 11:59 AM, Cheetham, Anastasia <[email protected]> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> Michelle, Simon and Antranig, >>>> >>>> We've been making great progress porting documentation to markdown. We're >>>> now faced with the question of who reviews pull requests for >>>> documentation. We never really discussed this. >>>> >>>> Does anyone have any thoughts on this? >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Anastasia Cheetham Inclusive Design Research Centre >>>> [email protected] Inclusive Design Institute >>>> OCAD University >>>> >>>> _______________________________________________________ >>>> fluid-work mailing list - [email protected] >>>> To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, >>>> see http://lists.idrc.ocad.ca/mailman/listinfo/fluid-work >>> >>> _______________________________________________________ >>> fluid-work mailing list - [email protected] >>> To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, >>> see http://lists.idrc.ocad.ca/mailman/listinfo/fluid-work >> >> _______________________________________________________ >> fluid-work mailing list - [email protected] >> To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, >> see http://lists.idrc.ocad.ca/mailman/listinfo/fluid-work >> > > _______________________________________________________ > fluid-work mailing list - [email protected] > To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, > see http://lists.idrc.ocad.ca/mailman/listinfo/fluid-work _______________________________________________________ fluid-work mailing list - [email protected] To unsubscribe, change settings or access archives, see http://lists.idrc.ocad.ca/mailman/listinfo/fluid-work
