Defects vs subsets #127
Defects vs subsets #127
Conversation
…n explicit Amplification section exists (instead, whatever paragraph immediately opens the guideline is just normative). We can continue to call it that but the subheading is not necessary.
Co-authored-by: Pete LeVasseur <[email protected]>
✅ Deploy Preview for scrc-coding-guidelines ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks @AlexCeleste for the excellent additions! Could you take a look at the comments I left?
By the way -- I think I recall you saying the plan is to incorporate these examples more into the Style Guideline to help flesh it out. Was that right? In this PR or another?
I suppose then it would be quite helpful to use the examples to illustrate the difference between a defect and subset.
| @@ -308,15 +304,27 @@ what it covers. | |||
| Content **SHOULD** aim to be as short and self-contained as possible, while still explaining | |||
| the scope of the guideline. | |||
|
|
|||
| Content **SHOULD NOT** cover the rationale for the guideline, which is done in the ``rationale`` section. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think you mentioned about removing the IETF RFC 2119-styling to this chapter when it was intended for readers. Now that it's intended for contributors are you thinking to keep it in?
Or is this change unrelated to that to aid in understanding?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Perhaps this was rewritten in order to read better? Curious to hear your thoughts.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Did you have some thoughts on this? Could we make use of MUST and MAY to specify which contents must be included and which ones are optional?
PLeVasseur
added this to the
Get some initial coding guidelines landed, get a sense of any challenges milestone
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Left a couple of thoughts! Thanks a bunch for sweeping through and addressing comments @AlexCeleste
| @@ -308,15 +304,27 @@ what it covers. | |||
| Content **SHOULD** aim to be as short and self-contained as possible, while still explaining | |||
| the scope of the guideline. | |||
|
|
|||
| Content **SHOULD NOT** cover the rationale for the guideline, which is done in the ``rationale`` section. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Perhaps this was rewritten in order to read better? Curious to hear your thoughts.
| @@ -308,15 +304,27 @@ what it covers. | |||
| Content **SHOULD** aim to be as short and self-contained as possible, while still explaining | |||
| the scope of the guideline. | |||
|
|
|||
| Content **SHOULD NOT** cover the rationale for the guideline, which is done in the ``rationale`` section. | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Did you have some thoughts on this? Could we make use of MUST and MAY to specify which contents must be included and which ones are optional?
This adds a basic example of three kinds of guideline: