search

OCDX / OCDX-Specification

Specification to describe the minimum information standard for online community data. Guidelines for describing data about online communities.
11 stars 11 forks source link

Update MIOCS.md #2

Closed megansquire closed 9 years ago

megansquire commented 9 years ago

a-4 and a-6 are copies of each other; clarified ds-4?

libbyh commented 9 years ago

Thanks, @megansquire! Good catch on the numbering errors. For Version, I think we meant "version of the dataset" though. Noticed another pair of numbering errors when checking that - the optional DS descriptors are numbered wrong. This is my first time managing a repo, so I'm not sure if I'm supposed to just (a) close the pull request without merging, (b) leave it open and ask you to fix it, or (c) merge it and make the fixes myself. Is there a normal practice here? Hopefully you or @derekgr can help me out there.

megansquire commented 9 years ago

I am just getting used to pull requests too. I edited my initial commit, so maybe it shows up as "version of data set" now. Alternatively, we can just delete my pull request and I can make a new one. I'm still learning github myself :)

-m

On Tue, Jun 2, 2015 at 4:17 PM, Libby Hemphill notifications@github.com wrote:

Thanks, @megansquire https://github.com/megansquire! Good catch on the numbering errors. For Version, I think we meant "version of the dataset" though. Noticed another pair of numbering errors when checking that - the optional DS descriptors are numbered wrong. This is my first time managing a repo, so I'm not sure if I'm supposed to just (a) close the pull request without merging, (b) leave it open and ask you to fix it, or (c) merge it and make the fixes myself. Is there a normal practice here? Hopefully you or @derekgr https://github.com/derekgr can help me out there.

— Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub https://github.com/libbyh/miocs/pull/2#issuecomment-108084749.

derekgr commented 9 years ago

@megansquire can make the suggested edits in her branch, the one associated with this pull request, and then push up that branch. The changes will be reflected here and @libbyh or whomever can review and then either give feedback for @megansquire to incorporate, or accept the pull request. It looks like @megansquire has already made the edit and pushed again, so we're at the place where @libbyh can either accept (and merge this pull request) or give feedback about further edits she wants before merging.

In this case, @megansquire has to make the edits, because she forked the repository to megansquire/miocs, and probably @libbyh hasn't been added as a collaborator there, so @libbyh can't push changes to the fork.

An alternative, if @megansquire is a collaborator on this repository, would be for her to create a branch in this repository with her changes, push that, and then make a pull request. Because @libbyh is the owner she could have then made commits on the branch without waiting for @megansquire to make the edits directly.

Sorry for so many words. Let me know if that didn't make sense!

derekgr commented 9 years ago

It looks like @megansquire already did the former path (made the edits in her fork, and pushed them up). In this pull request, if you click on the "Files changed" tab, you can see that the text now says "Version of this data set".

derekgr commented 9 years ago

Some other tips, if you haven't had enough words from me:

update_miocs_md_by_megansquire_ _pull_request__2_ _libbyh_miocs
libbyh commented 9 years ago

Thank you, @derekgr and @megansquire !