2017-02-08 11:27 GMT+01:00 Alexander Bruy <[email protected]>:
> Disclaimer: I'm not a documentation writer, so feel free to ignore my > comments. > > Me neither. I'm not in charge of anything in the documentation so my comments had no more weight than any other member of the community. > 2017-02-08 11:57 GMT+02:00 DelazJ <[email protected]>: > > Nowhere in the discussion you pointed I can see a barrier to any > > contribution from core dev. What was asked is to do like most of us: > make a > > pull request that can be reviewed and discussed by interested people. > This > > way, we avoid breaking silently documentation build (not only the > > application repo is concerned, you know that - it has already occured) > and > > ensure a contribution free of typo or mistake. > > Personally I see no sense in passing ALL edits via pull-request mechanism. > While this makes sense for huge edits which add a lot of new text, creating > a PR for small edits or removals of obsolete part of documentation looks > like > overhead for me. > > Quoting myself: "I mistakenly(?) thought (and was proud) that the option taken to proceed through PRs submission (*for not obvious fixes*) to QGIS repo was already in the DNA of QGIS-DOC contributors." Harrissou > This was on the form, and on the substance I have some concerns about the > > commit itself: eg, do we need to remove any mention of Taudem, including > > instructions on configuring its provider when linked to QGIS? > > As I already said, I see no sense in keeping instructions for 3rd > party/external > tools in the QGIS User Guide. Those should be part of the that 3rd party > tool > manual. > > -- > Alexander Bruy >
_______________________________________________ Qgis-developer mailing list [email protected] List info: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer Unsubscribe: https://lists.osgeo.org/mailman/listinfo/qgis-developer
