Paul Hoffman <[email protected]> wrote: >> To be clear, what I was trying to say was not that all the RPC's >> changes should be in one PR -- though I think that's easiest for the >> RPC at this point -- but rather that as they iterate on a given set of >> changes they should be in a single PR.
> How do you picture those author responses to the PR going? Simply as
> comments in the PR? Text changes done as commits in the branch that
> created the PR? Or something else?
If it's github-focused (rather than git), then authors should use the
Suggestion mechanism. With the RPC accepting the suggestion, possibly
causing other changes.
> I ask because I suck at commenting in PRs for documents, and when I do
> so, I get wildly different advice from the authors about the proper way
> to comment in a PR. It would be good if the RPC could say to authors
> ahead of time how the authors should interact with the PR (just as they
> are told how to respond to AUTH48 email).
THe suggestion mechanism has some limits: it can't edit any text that wasn't
already touched. I'm curious how the advice differs ;-)
--
Michael Richardson <[email protected]> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting )
Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ rfc-interest mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]
