FazBrowse GitHub Viewer | Trending |
URL:
| Home
Tools: [Download Repo ZIP]   [Original HTTPS Page]

doc: add a remark to Collaborators discussion page by iam-frankqiu · Pull Request #36420 · nodejs/node · GitHub

/ node Public

doc: add a remark to Collaborators discussion page - #36420

Merged
Trott merged 1 commit into
nodejs:masterfrom
iam-frankqiu:doc_governance
Dec 21, 2020
Merged

doc: add a remark to Collaborators discussion page#36420
Trott merged 1 commit into
nodejs:masterfrom
iam-frankqiu:doc_governance

Conversation

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Add a remark to Collaborators discussion page. refer to: #36335

Checklist
  • make -j4 test (UNIX), or vcbuild test (Windows) passes
  • documentation is changed or added
  • commit message follows commit guidelines

nodejs-github-bot added the meta Issues and PRs related to the general management of the project. label Dec 7, 2020
Comment thread GOVERNANCE.md Outdated
Comment on lines 154 to 155

Trott Dec 9, 2020
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Choose a reason Spam Abuse Off Topic Outdated Duplicate Resolved Low Quality

Maybe this instead?:

Suggested change
frictionless as possible. Use the [Collaborators discussion page][](only
Collaborators have permissions to view) to request
frictionless as possible. Use the private [Collaborators discussion page][]
to request

Is "private" sufficiently clear in this case?

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Choose a reason Spam Abuse Off Topic Outdated Duplicate Resolved Low Quality

Sorry. I don't think so. It will make me feel confused when I read private. I think my remark is more clear than private.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Choose a reason Spam Abuse Off Topic Outdated Duplicate Resolved Low Quality

I think my remark is more clear than private.

That's true. What you wrote is more clear than my suggestion.

What I was trying to avoid was separating "Use the Collaborators discussion board" from what to use it for: "to request feedback from other Collaborators in private."

Current sentence: "Use the Collaborators discussion board to request feedback from other Collaborators in private."

With change here: "Use the Collaborators discussion board (only Collaborators have permissions to view) to request feedback from other Collaborators in private."

I feel like that makes the resulting sentence harder to understand.

How about this?:

Use the Collaborators discussion board to requeist feedback from other Collaborators in private. Only Collaborators can view the private discussion board.

Or maybe this?:

To request feedback from other Collaborators in private, use the Collaborators discussion board (which only Collaborators may view).

I'm open to other ideas if these suggestions are no good. I'm also OK if this lands as-is, but I do prefer to not have a parenthetical clause as an aside in the middle of the sentence.

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Choose a reason Spam Abuse Off Topic Outdated Duplicate Resolved Low Quality

Thank you for your advice. I think the second idea is pretty good.

iam-frankqiu requested a review from Trott December 11, 2020 13:35
PR-URL: nodejs#36420
Reviewed-By: Gireesh Punathil <gpunathi@in.ibm.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Beth Griggs <bgriggs@redhat.com>
Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <joyeec9h3@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
Trott merged commit bea2252 into nodejs:master Dec 21, 2020

Trott commented Dec 21, 2020

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

Landed in bea2252

targos pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Dec 21, 2020
PR-URL: #36420
Reviewed-By: Gireesh Punathil <gpunathi@in.ibm.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Beth Griggs <bgriggs@redhat.com>
Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <joyeec9h3@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
targos pushed a commit that referenced this pull request May 1, 2021
PR-URL: #36420
Reviewed-By: Gireesh Punathil <gpunathi@in.ibm.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Beth Griggs <bgriggs@redhat.com>
Reviewed-By: Joyee Cheung <joyeec9h3@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
danielleadams mentioned this pull request May 3, 2021
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters. Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

meta Issues and PRs related to the general management of the project.

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants


Back | FazBrowse Home | New Git URL