On Tue, Mar 13, 2018 at 1:51 PM, Amar Tumballi <atumb...@redhat.com> wrote:
> >> >> >> Further, as we hit end of March, we would make it mandatory for >> features >> >> to have required spec and doc labels, before the code is merged, so >> >> factor in efforts for the same if not already done. >> > >> > >> > Could you explain the point above further? Is it just the label or the >> > spec/doc >> > that we need merged before the patch is merged? >> > >> >> I'll hazard a guess that the intent of the label is to indicate >> availability of the doc. "Completeness" of code is being defined as >> including specifications and documentation. >> >> > I believe this has originated from maintainers meeting agreements [1] . > The proposal to make a spec and documentation mandatory was submitted 3 > months back and is documented, and submitted for comment @ > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1AFkZmRRDXRxs21GnGauieIyiIiRZ- > nTEW8CPi7Gbp3g/edit?usp=sharing > > Thanks! This clears almost all the doubts I had :). > The idea is, if the code is going to be released, it should have relevant > documentation for users to use it, otherwise, it doesn't matter if the > feature is present or not. If the feature is 'default', and there is no > documentation required, just mention it, so the flags can be given. Also, > if there is no general agreement about the design, it doesn't make sense to > merge a feature and then someone has to redo things. > > For any experimental code, which we want to publish for other developers > to test, who doesn't need documentation, we have 'experimental' branch, > which should be used for validation. > > [1] - http://lists.gluster.org/pipermail/gluster-devel/2017- > December/054070.html > -- Pranith
_______________________________________________ Gluster-devel mailing list Gluster-devel@gluster.org http://lists.gluster.org/mailman/listinfo/gluster-devel