Front page | perl.perl5.porters |
Postings from January 2011
On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 6:24 AM, David Golden <xdaveg@gmail.com> wrote: > I liked Ricardo's suggestion: "Documentation updates are acceptable if > they fix broken links, broken Pod, or correct factual errors." That's > very specific and on par with the other bullet points relating to > code. Me too, but I'm not sure that covers everything. Just as with code, we have to balance risk, value, and maintenance burden. Trivial typo fixes are low risk, but also low value and a few dozen of them can easily clog the cherrymaint process. But the new support policy is important to get out into the wild and available on perldoc.perl.org before 5.14, so it's value trumps the other considerations even though it doesn't exactly fix anything broken. I guess there will always be exceptions. I would be happy to see one or two people designated to cherry pick doc patches without going through the voting process, but I'm not volunteering to be one of those people.Thread Previous | Thread Next