[SciPy-dev] 2-review system on doc wiki

Stéfan van der Walt stefan@sun.ac...
Sun Feb 14 10:07:43 CST 2010

On 14 February 2010 17:12, Bruce Southey <bsouthey@gmail.com> wrote:
> I just think that the 'bar' here is set too high for a volunteer
> project. Also I think that this 'new version' is asking too much
> especially when people have been working under a rather different
> approach. Also there is no conflict resolution between all the steps
> involved.

This whole issue looks much more complicated than it is.  We simply
need two (possibly overlapping) groups of people to answer the
following questions:

1) Is the docstring technically accurate? (Examples correct, docstring
format followed, etc.)
2) Is the docstring well written and easily understandable? (Language
use, simplicity)

However, I think the reviewing process is much too daunting as it is,
so we'll need to simply everything by providing:

- An easy way to reach numpy / scipy docstrings for editing (currently
requires >1 click)
- An easy way to review (maybe an automated weekly post to the list
with prioritised request for review)
- Simpler explanations of the differences between docstring and
reference guide editing
- Easy integration of patches into the source code (everything is in
place, but we need to make the process clear)


More information about the SciPy-Dev mailing list