search

sdmx-twg / vtl

This repository is used for maintaining the SDMX-VTL specification
9 stars 8 forks source link

Collaboration guidelines #507

Open romaintailhurat opened 1 month ago

romaintailhurat commented 1 month ago

Making Sense and Meaningful Data will help with providing content to the 2.1 documentation.

We still have to agree on how to do that.

What I propose is the following:

This way, you can properly validate every contribution. What do you think?

romaintailhurat commented 1 month ago

@javihern98 you already created a https://github.com/sdmx-twg/vtl/tree/docs-dev, we probably use this one, but do you agree on the use of forks + PR?

javihern98 commented 1 month ago

Hi @romaintailhurat, we are already pushing into the main repository, instead of a forked one, as we believe just adding specific branches will be necessary, instead of forking the whole project. We should only be concerned about placing the files in the specific directories, as with the current layout we should be able to just add the documentation and it will be automatically linked

romaintailhurat commented 1 month ago

I also provided a small setup guide, for now in a proper branch for agreement: https://github.com/sdmx-twg/vtl/blob/romain/v2.1/docs/README.md

romaintailhurat commented 1 month ago

Hi @romaintailhurat, we are already pushing into the main repository, instead of a forked one, as we believe just adding specific branches will be necessary, instead of forking the whole project. We should only be concerned about placing the files in the specific directories, as with the current layout we should be able to just add the documentation and it will be automatically linked

Hi 👋

I don't personally mind using only branches but using forks is a way to use PR which are a good and integrated way for Angelo or Attilio to validate changes.

So, ok for using feature branches.

I suggest at least to separate reference manual work from user manual, so using for example a docs-dev/user-manual for the latter.

What do you think @javihern98 @NicoLaval ?

javihern98 commented 1 month ago

Yes, I agree. We will attempt to rename our branch to docs-dev/reference-manual

romaintailhurat commented 1 month ago

It wasn't possible to create docs-dev/user-manual because of the existence of docs-dev, so I just created a docs-dev-um for the user manual part. Feel free to mirror this naming or not. 😄