On 17/11/16 12:55, Anne Gentle wrote: > > > On Tue, Nov 8, 2016 at 5:42 AM, Alexandra Settle > <alexandra.set...@rackspace.com <mailto:alexandra.set...@rackspace.com>> > wrote: >
<snip> > > Sorry for all the questions! Just many thoughts running through my head. > Let it be known that I definitely think this is a good idea! But I suggest > some lines are drawn so we are all clearly on the same page. > > > I suggest we try it and see what chaos ensues with these guidelines: > 1. If it's technically accurate, merge it. If it fixes a bug correctly, merge > it. > 2. If it's accurate and correct but could be written better, edit, then merge > it with a comment to coach the person how the writing could be better. > 3. If it's not the kind of patch we want for the docs, explain that in the > review and also follow up to make sure the person doesn't feel rejected > outright. Take ownership of the coaching areas more than the "this is wrong > and here's why" aspect. (I'm not saying your reviews are like that, mind you, > I just want ownership of the growth of contributors and the accurate doc > base, not ownership of "it meets our English standards.") > I like these guidelines! What about relaxing our requirements on the number of votes required? Is a +1 and a +2A enough? L -- Lana Brindley Technical Writer Rackspace Cloud Builders Australia http://lanabrindley.com
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
-- Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~openstack-doc-core Post to : openstack-doc-core@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~openstack-doc-core More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
