search

googlefonts / googlefonts.github.io

Google Fonts documentation
https://googlefonts.github.io
Apache License 2.0
58 stars 27 forks source link

New Workflow chapter #115

Closed RosaWagner closed 11 months ago

RosaWagner commented 11 months ago

Probably a lot of typos. I think it would help the review to read directly the output and make amending PRs

RosaWagner commented 11 months ago

@eliheuer Okay, vivi made a PR for some typos in the first quarter of the chapter, we would have to merge that first. Maybe we need to come up with a strategy to avoid conflicts in the copy editing

eliheuer commented 11 months ago

@RosaWagner If we can merge the other PR I can manually fix up the merge conflicts with this one as needed tomorrow.

If there is a better strategy, I can't think of it now.

Edit: of just merge this because it seems more complete, whatever is easiest. I can fix up the merge conflicts if there isn't a better option.

eliheuer commented 11 months ago

It was not easy to read the diff for this, I'm going to merge this and then double check it against commit 1249140 in the workflow-guide branch

eliheuer commented 11 months ago

Ok, merging this caused some problems, let's not delete the workflow-guide branch until this is fully fixed up and edited.

vv-monsalve commented 11 months ago

Following the comments made in the review, my suggestion is to focus on copyediting fixes for this chapter. This documentation is a significant effort that summarizes and supports the workflow changes that have taken place over the years. Some of these changes are related to management-level goals and decisions made in the past. The process has evolved in response to these goals, and as Rosa mentioned it requires significant effort from the team working on it 8 hours a day to ensure it works for everyone, not just users and new contributors (which are only one within the many stakeholders).

It's important to consider the work that has already been done to organize and specialize this process over the years, as well as the high-level vision and requirements that have led to its current status. Personal views and perceptions of the roles and processes involved should consider these factors. It's not "pessimistic" or "negative" to acknowledge the challenges involved in this process.

davelab6 commented 11 months ago

Eli, overall I think Rosalie should write these docs for the workflow as she has established it in cooperation with me, Chris and the other onboarders. Aspirations to be more practically effective at public participation are good, but they don't reflect the current workflow, and it's the current workflow I want documented and socialized to all onboarders in q4/q1. Then in q2+ we can manage a measurable change management process to meet such aspirations.