Get final merges in to Ubuntu Docs

[Kevin Godby]

Hi, Stephen.

On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 10:11 PM, Stephen M. Webb
<stephen.webb at canonical.com> wrote:
> I respectfully disagree.  I have never worked on a project that is not short of time and people.  The "get as much done
> as possible" has to include following the proper steps to make sure a second set of eyes reviews every change.
>
> The engineering side of Ubuntu has spent the last few cycles ensuring quality of the technical side of the project
> through processes such as mandatory peer reviews of all changes and extensive automated testing.  It would be a shame if
> the documemntation side did not reflect that.
>
> Everyone involved needs to take the time to review some merge proposals at least for grammar and spelling.  It's not an
> onerous task.

First, thanks for your input, I really appreciate it!  (I also noticed
your MP and I'll take a look at getting that incorporated in soon,
too.)

To clarify my position, I'm suggesting that we forego the usual MP
route for this cycle only due to the lack of time and personnel.  Once
the documentation has been cleaned up this cycle, we can go back to
the usual MP procedures for 14.04.

A few tidbits of information may help illustrate the issues:

For this cycle, there have been only two direct committers to the
repository: me and Doug.  There are only 13 people currently
authorized to commit directly to the repository.

This cycle has seen only five merge proposals (including the one you
just submitted).

The bulk of the editing thus far has been done by Doug, John, and me.

I'm only about halfway through the list of files to check against the
GNOME docs.

Our documentation is woefully out of date. It was last updated a year
ago.  So we're committing a lot more changes than normal. That's a lot
of diffs for someone to have to review.

If I were to go through the MP process, I'd be waiting for Doug to
review my changes and commit them.  And vice versa.  Doug and I
correspond off-list quite frequently and keep a pretty close eye on
what the other is doing as is, so it's not much of an issue at the
moment.

Those are the facts that I took into consideration in arguing for the
temporary suspension of the MP process. I'm hopeful that things will
settle down a bit after this cycle and we can get back to the regular
MP process for 14.04.

—Kevin