Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-db-derby-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 19071 invoked from network); 7 Sep 2006 20:59:18 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (209.237.227.199) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 7 Sep 2006 20:59:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 84932 invoked by uid 500); 7 Sep 2006 20:59:18 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-db-derby-dev-archive@db.apache.org Received: (qmail 84720 invoked by uid 500); 7 Sep 2006 20:59:17 -0000 Mailing-List: contact derby-dev-help@db.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: Delivered-To: mailing list derby-dev@db.apache.org Received: (qmail 84711 invoked by uid 99); 7 Sep 2006 20:59:17 -0000 Received: from asf.osuosl.org (HELO asf.osuosl.org) (140.211.166.49) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 07 Sep 2006 13:59:17 -0700 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=10.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (asf.osuosl.org: domain of jta@bristowhill.com designates 66.75.162.134 as permitted sender) Received: from [66.75.162.134] (HELO ms-smtp-02.socal.rr.com) (66.75.162.134) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 07 Sep 2006 13:59:16 -0700 Received: from [192.168.15.53] (cpe-72-130-190-172.san.res.rr.com [72.130.190.172]) by ms-smtp-02.socal.rr.com (8.13.6/8.13.6) with ESMTP id k87KwrYP002767 for ; Thu, 7 Sep 2006 13:58:53 -0700 (PDT) Message-ID: <4500880D.2030805@bristowhill.com> Date: Thu, 07 Sep 2006 13:58:53 -0700 From: "Jean T. Anderson" Reply-To: jta@bristowhill.com User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird 1.0.7-1.1.fc3 (X11/20050929) X-Accept-Language: en-us, en MIME-Version: 1.0 To: derby-dev@db.apache.org Subject: Re: New contributors? References: <20060907005358.15359.qmail@web81309.mail.mud.yahoo.com> <44FF9CA2.6010001@apache.org> <45006997.70200@bristowhill.com> <450082AE.8010103@apache.org> In-Reply-To: <450082AE.8010103@apache.org> X-Enigmail-Version: 0.93.0.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Scanned: Symantec AntiVirus Scan Engine X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org X-Spam-Rating: minotaur.apache.org 1.6.2 0/1000/N Daniel John Debrunner wrote: > Jean T. Anderson wrote: > >>It might be helpful for reviewers to clearly separate "must fix" items >>from "nice to have" items in their comments. > > Sounds great, but what is a must fix? A simple definition could be anything that would prevent it from being committed. If a committer doesn't have confidence in a change introduced by the patch, then it should *not* be committed. To take a concrete example ..... I won't commit a doc patch unless: - Somebody indicates the changes are technically ok. - The DITA doc build succeeds. But if something isn't worded quite the way I would personally word it, I leave it be -- there's lots of room for style in documentation. Small improvements that advance the info further are good and others can take it even further. -jean