From 7a24e99bda3ca8b010a0b986e8dbb89334636fbd Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Nils Lehnen <30603423+iderex@users.noreply.github.com> Date: Mon, 31 Aug 2026 09:54:07 +0200 Subject: [PATCH] Write the three sites in the first person instead of naming a role (#229) Three tracked files described me from outside with a role word. I write in the first person here, so the word is gone from all four of its sites and each sentence now says the thing it was actually about. docs/promotion.md said an experiment does not gain that role by being taken somewhere. What the sentence means is that nobody takes on keeping it working, and it now says so. docs/quality-parity.md gave the reason for a required approving review count of zero as a property of the board's staffing. The reason is mine: I am the only reviewer here, and a count above zero would refuse every merge. internal/invariants/invariants.go named the tracker issue by that role twice, once in the comment on the declared licence and once in the message the licence leg prints when it was not asked. Both now name issue #46, which is how every other reference to it in this tree is written and is a pointer a reader can follow. The failure this prevents is text that reports on me in the third person outliving the reason anybody wrote it that way, and a reference that can only be resolved by knowing who is meant. Signed-off-by: Nils Lehnen <30603423+iderex@users.noreply.github.com> --- docs/promotion.md | 4 ++-- docs/quality-parity.md | 2 +- internal/invariants/invariants.go | 8 ++++---- 3 files changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/docs/promotion.md b/docs/promotion.md index 737b0d8..7734973 100644 --- a/docs/promotion.md +++ b/docs/promotion.md @@ -65,8 +65,8 @@ names which corners those were while the reason is still remembered. ## What promotion does not create It is not a promise of support from this board. Nothing here is maintained -against anybody else's use of it, and an experiment does not gain a maintainer -by being taken somewhere. +against anybody else's use of it, and an experiment does not gain anybody who +will keep it working by being taken somewhere. It is not a claim that the code is finished. The line above about what would have to change is the measure of that, and it is part of the hand-over rather diff --git a/docs/quality-parity.md b/docs/quality-parity.md index 317bd34..8fbe4ed 100644 --- a/docs/quality-parity.md +++ b/docs/quality-parity.md @@ -705,7 +705,7 @@ below is the one that was absent either way. | Parameter | Here | Target | Verdict | | --- | --- | --- | --- | | `allowed_merge_methods` | `["merge","squash","rebase"]` | `["merge"]` | Change owed. This is the one deviation in this walk worth closing rather than reasoning away, and the reason is below. | -| `required_approving_review_count` | `0` | `0` | Kept. A count above zero on a board with one maintainer refuses every merge, and a rule nobody can satisfy is switched off in a hurry rather than met. | +| `required_approving_review_count` | `0` | `0` | Kept. A count above zero on a board where I am the only reviewer refuses every merge, and a rule nobody can satisfy is switched off in a hurry rather than met. | | `dismiss_stale_reviews_on_push` | `false` | `false` | Kept. It only bites where a review is required, and none is required at a count of zero. | | `require_last_push_approval` | `false` | `false` | Kept, for the reason in the row above. | | `required_review_thread_resolution` | `false` | `false` | Kept, for the reason two rows above. | diff --git a/internal/invariants/invariants.go b/internal/invariants/invariants.go index be63430..4ee44f5 100644 --- a/internal/invariants/invariants.go +++ b/internal/invariants/invariants.go @@ -71,9 +71,9 @@ const ( ) // DeclaredLicence is the licence this repository has decided on. Record 0018 -// answers entry one of the maintainer question issue with GPL-3.0, one licence -// for the runner and the experiment content alike, and issue #47 is the change -// that lands the file and sets this string. +// answers entry one of issue #46 with GPL-3.0, one licence for the runner and +// the experiment content alike, and issue #47 is the change that lands the file +// and sets this string. // // IT IS SPELLED AS THE TITLE LINE RATHER THAN AS THE SPDX IDENTIFIER, and that // is forced by what the leg below asks. The leg asks whether the licence file @@ -368,7 +368,7 @@ func licenceLeg(root, declaredLicence string) (Leg, []Refusal) { return Leg{ Name: "the licence", NotAsked: fmt.Sprintf("no licence is declared, so there is nothing to compare %s against. "+ - "asking costs answering entry one of the maintainer question issue and landing the file, "+ + "asking costs answering entry one of issue #46 and landing the file, "+ "the repository metadata and the decision record that names it, which is issue #47", LicenceName), }, nil }