+1 Good. PR should contain documentation. Regards, Chiwan Park
> On Jun 4, 2015, at 12:24 AM, Lokesh Rajaram <rajaram.lok...@gmail.com> wrote: > > +1. I like this idea, not sure if my vote counts :) > > On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 8:21 AM, Robert Metzger <rmetz...@apache.org> wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> as part of making our codebase ready for the upcoming 0.9 release, I've >> started to go over the documentation of Flink. >> >> It seems that our current approach for documenting stuff: >> - We implement and merge a feature >> - We open a JIRA for documenting it. >> >> Before the release, we realize that we have many open documentation issues >> (currently 26) and hope that somebody (in this case me) is fixing them. >> >> Some of the pull requests also contain documentation, but certainly not all >> of them. >> >> >> I am proposing to: >> - add a rule to our coding guidelines [1] which states that every change >> that affects the documentation needs to update the documentation >> accordingly. >> - Committers have to make sure that pull request are following the rule >> before accepting the change. Otherwise, we reject the pull request. >> >> >> [1] http://flink.apache.org/coding-guidelines.html >>
