Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

add Trivial Changes description to Workstream Policy #228

Open
wants to merge 1 commit into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from

Conversation

tantek
Copy link
Member

@tantek tantek commented Mar 12, 2024

Insert agreed and approved "Trivial Changes" definition from #63 (comment) into our Workstream Policy per agreement in #63 (comment)

Insert agreed and approved "Trivial Changes" definition from #63 (comment) into our Workstream Policy per agreement in #63 (comment)
@tantek tantek requested review from cwilso and annevk March 12, 2024 17:43
Copy link
Contributor

@cwilso cwilso left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

Copy link
Member

@annevk annevk left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I wonder if we should replace "change(s)" with "contribution(s)" throughout in this new section. I think that would be slightly better.

Comment on lines +110 to +111
* Makes no changes to the visible text content (for example, fixing broken links, style sheets or markup), OR
* Does not affect conformance (e.g. corrects a typographic error in a descriptive sentence), which should not change architectural or interoperability requirements for an implementation. Such changes should be small in scope (e.g., on the order of a few dozen characters changed at most); correcting non-normative code examples where the code clearly conflicts with normative requirements is fine, adding new non-normative code examples is not.
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Suggested change
* Makes no changes to the visible text content (for example, fixing broken links, style sheets or markup), OR
* Does not affect conformance (e.g. corrects a typographic error in a descriptive sentence), which should not change architectural or interoperability requirements for an implementation. Such changes should be small in scope (e.g., on the order of a few dozen characters changed at most); correcting non-normative code examples where the code clearly conflicts with normative requirements is fine, adding new non-normative code examples is not.
* Makes no changes to the visible text content (for example, fixing broken links, style sheets or markup).
* Does not affect conformance (e.g., corrects a typographic error in a descriptive sentence), which should not change architectural or interoperability requirements for an implementation. Such changes should be small in scope (e.g., on the order of a few dozen characters changed at most); correcting non-normative code examples where the code clearly conflicts with normative requirements is fine, adding new non-normative code examples is not.

@tantek tantek added the agenda On the agenda for the next SG meeting label Mar 21, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
agenda On the agenda for the next SG meeting
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

4 participants