https://bugzilla.wikimedia.org/show_bug.cgi?id=36437
Andre Klapper <aklap...@wikimedia.org> changed:
What |Removed |Added
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
See Also| |https://bugzilla.wikimedia.
| |org/show_bug.cgi?id=35467
--- Comment #7 from Andre Klapper <aklap...@wikimedia.org> ---
Yesterday night I read
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Git/Workflow#Who_can_review.3F_Gerrit_project_owners
and failed to find out what I'm expected to do with my patches in Gerrit that
have received two +1s.
Just do it and merge? Wait for someone providing a +2?
I still have no idea what I'm expected to do (or not) & the docs don't tell me.
Hence my random two cents on our Git/Gerrit documentation:
Git/Gerrit should be a starting page. Highlevel overview. Keep actions (I want
to do X) and roles ("I only want to get&run code" vs. "I want to develop and
contribute back") in mind. Do NOT explain checking out etc like currently done.
Separate Git and Gerrit frontpages could be killed.
Have some Git page only for people that only want to check out and compile but
not commit code. They don't need info on Gerrit or how to commit/push.
Cruft: Git/Workflow is written in future tense (before migration to Git/Gerrit)
and should be merged with Git/Tutorial. I don't care about stuff like "Gerrit
2.3" and I don't even want to know which Gerrit version we run...
Sections like Git/Workflow#Troubleshooting Git/Workflow#Troubleshooting_2
could be merged into Git/Tips and/or a Troubleshooting.
Gerrit/Navigation title could make clear it's about web interface only.
--
You are receiving this mail because:
You are the assignee for the bug.
You are watching all bug changes.
_______________________________________________
Wikibugs-l mailing list
Wikibugs-l@lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikibugs-l
