openstack-doc-core team mailing list archive

["Kato, Tomoyuki" <kato.tomoyuki@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

> On 01/10/15 06:37, Lana Brindley wrote:
> > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> > Hash: SHA1
> >
> > On 30/09/15 16:41, Andreas Jaeger wrote:
> >> Let me open a side discussion:
> >>
> >> I also see far too many bug reports getting asked for.
> >>
> >> We have been liberal about "obvious" bugs. So, a typo does not need a
> >> bug report. A one-line addition of an OpenStack project that is part o
> > f
> >> the big tent to a list of repos doesn't need one (a complete new chapt
> > er
> >> needs IMHO something) etc.
> >>
> >>
> >> Some people just create those but let's not complicate contribution an
> > d
> >> if a patch is obvious, include it.
> >>
> >> There's no sense to create a bug report "like X is missing in list Y"
> >> and then confirm it, and fix it.
> >>
> >
> > I absolutely agree with you here, and it's more or less what I was
> > trying to get to by saying we needed to trust everyone's judgement. If
> > you notice a typo, you don't need a bug, and if you have a bug, you
> > don't need it triaged before you fix it.
> >
> > We need to allow people to have control over what they're doing, while
> > still maintaining good quality control. That's a tricky balance to
> > manage, and I don't have any brilliant ideas outside of 'keep talking to
> > people about this'. Happy to hear your collective wisdom :)
> >
> 
> +1 Completely agree. This is what I was trying to get at with the 'case
> study' as well.
> 
> Instead of looking at the technical content, we went straight to getting
> hung up on whether a bug was triaged or not. That doesn't make sense to
> me :)
> 
> Regards,
> 
> 
> Tom

+1

Thanks,
KATO Tomoyuki