On 2014-06-02, at 2:06 PM, Colin Clark wrote: > Note that we could, if we thought it was worthwhile, create a set of > suggestions and recommendations for the documentation team to follow, rather > than a formalized, all-or-nothing process. I can imagine those > recommendations would include something to the effect of “unless the changes > are small, documentation committers should themselves submit them as pull > requests and ask for peer review,” without requiring this to be formalized.
I like this approach. There will certainly be scenarios where someone on the docs team is just cleaning up docs, fixing formatting, tweaking, etc. In these kinds of scenarios, a pull request and review seems unnecessary. On the other hand, if someone is documenting new functionality, a review would ensure that a second set of eyes checks the docs for clarity, working links, etc. before it goes in. This ensure that most docs will have a second look before they get in, but maintaining (as opposed to creating) is a bit simpler. -- 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
