On 2016-05-12 15:39, Jeremy Stanley wrote: > On 2016-05-12 07:33:35 -0600 (-0600), Matt Kassawara wrote: > [...] >> I'm also not a fan of option 3 because it trades one kind of technical debt >> for another. However, one could argue that some (relevant) content is >> better than no (or defunct) content. Interestingly, option 3 also reflects >> what ultimately happens if projects decide to maintain all documentation in >> their respective repositories. Easier for developers to contribute, but at >> the expense of usability by our various audiences. > > While not a frequent reviewer of changes to Docs team repos, I tend > to agree that option 3 is just shuffling around (or even increasing) > the overall pain. > > For option 2 keep in mind that our current version of Gerrit allows > you to make edits from its Web UI in your browser, so it may be > almost as easy to correct trivial issues while you're reviewing > instead of commenting on them. >
And that's what I'm sometimes doing if it's just some minor issues. Edit, publish, summarize my changes - and then +2 ;). That's a really nice thing of our WebUI, Andreas -- Andreas Jaeger aj@{suse.com,opensuse.org} Twitter: jaegerandi SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126 __________________________________________________________________________ OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions) Unsubscribe: openstack-dev-requ...@lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev