Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

doc: Stream 'finish' event string interpolation fix #12221

Closed

Conversation

vhmth
Copy link
Contributor

@vhmth vhmth commented Apr 4, 2017

Checklist
  • [x ] documentation is changed or added
  • [x ] commit message follows commit guidelines
Affected core subsystem(s)

doc

Description of change

String interpolation in the docs in the Stream 'finish' event example does not use back ticks `.

@nodejs-github-bot nodejs-github-bot added doc Issues and PRs related to the documentations. stream Issues and PRs related to the stream subsystem. labels Apr 4, 2017
@aqrln
Copy link
Contributor

aqrln commented Apr 4, 2017

Good catch and thanks for the contribution! Can you please format your commit message according to the commit guidelines? The first word after the subsystem must start with a lowercase letter (and should be an imperative verb) and the whole line must not exceed 50 characters.

Copy link
Contributor

@vsemozhetbyt vsemozhetbyt left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM with the mentioned nits concerning commit message.

@vhmth vhmth force-pushed the vinay/fix_stream_finish_interpolation branch from 1f17c54 to a143a81 Compare April 4, 2017 21:42
@vhmth
Copy link
Contributor Author

vhmth commented Apr 4, 2017

Done! Should fit in 50 chars now too

@aqrln
Copy link
Contributor

aqrln commented Apr 4, 2017

@vhmth great!

@vsemozhetbyt IMO, the change is trivial enough to not wait for 48 hours to land. What do you think?

@vsemozhetbyt
Copy link
Contributor

vsemozhetbyt commented Apr 4, 2017

@aqrln I am still a bit uncertain about timeframe in these cases. @nodejs/documentation, how quick can such fixes be landed?

@jasnell
Copy link
Member

jasnell commented Apr 4, 2017

The minimum time for most PRs is 48 hours, 72 hours over the weekend. We can shorten the time for very trivial doc changes but those are rare.

@vhmth
Copy link
Contributor Author

vhmth commented Apr 4, 2017

Don't worry guys we have all the time in the world once singularity hits. 🤖

@vsemozhetbyt
Copy link
Contributor

@jasnell Is this trivial? If so, how much can the time be shorten?

Copy link
Member

@Trott Trott left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM

@Trott
Copy link
Member

Trott commented Apr 4, 2017

There's no hard-and-fast rules on what is "trivial" and how much things can be shortened. Use your judgment. (And if your judgment is way off, someone will tell you. The CTC can always revise the rules if there's an epidemic of PRs landing too quickly.)

In my opinion, this is definitely trivial enough that you can land it right now. (I generally try to get at least two other people to say "yeah, land this right away", if that helps.) It's a tiny doc change that is easy and harmless to undo if it turns out there's something wrong with it that we're all missing.

@Trott
Copy link
Member

Trott commented Apr 4, 2017

(All that said: If in doubt, just wait the 48 hours. There's no huge benefit to trivial docs landing faster other than it keeping them out of our backlog and not frustrating contributors who just want to add a missing apostrophe in a doc or something like that.)

@vhmth
Copy link
Contributor Author

vhmth commented Apr 4, 2017

Are y'all able to set up a system where PRs get auto-merged at the 48hr mark with a certain amount of approvals?

@jasnell
Copy link
Member

jasnell commented Apr 4, 2017

@vhmth ... auto-merging generally is not a great approach. In addition to the 48 hours, most PRs require one or more CI runs, may need additional testing using our "Canary in the Gold Mine" (CITGM) tool, or otherwise just need another set of eyes to sanity check things. There are also a number of requirements we have for squashing and formatting commit messages that we could automate but there's little apparent benefit in doing so.

@jasnell
Copy link
Member

jasnell commented Apr 4, 2017

btw, +1 to this being trivial enough to land whenever you're ready.

vsemozhetbyt pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 4, 2017
PR-URL: #12221
Reviewed-By: Vse Mozhet Byt <vsemozhetbyt@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
@vsemozhetbyt
Copy link
Contributor

Landed in 82ef00c

Thank you, @vhmth !

@vhmth
Copy link
Contributor Author

vhmth commented Apr 4, 2017

Boom!

italoacasas pushed a commit to italoacasas/node that referenced this pull request Apr 10, 2017
PR-URL: nodejs#12221
Reviewed-By: Vse Mozhet Byt <vsemozhetbyt@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
@italoacasas italoacasas mentioned this pull request Apr 10, 2017
2 tasks
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 18, 2017
PR-URL: #12221
Reviewed-By: Vse Mozhet Byt <vsemozhetbyt@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
MylesBorins pushed a commit that referenced this pull request Apr 19, 2017
PR-URL: #12221
Reviewed-By: Vse Mozhet Byt <vsemozhetbyt@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
@MylesBorins MylesBorins mentioned this pull request Apr 19, 2017
andrew749 pushed a commit to michielbaird/node that referenced this pull request Jul 19, 2017
PR-URL: nodejs/node#12221
Reviewed-By: Vse Mozhet Byt <vsemozhetbyt@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: James M Snell <jasnell@gmail.com>
Reviewed-By: Rich Trott <rtrott@gmail.com>
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
doc Issues and PRs related to the documentations. stream Issues and PRs related to the stream subsystem.
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

7 participants