making review/bug filing optional for some docs changes

[Gervase Markham]

Shane H. W. Travis wrote:
> Myk asked my permission before he put this log up, specifically because of
> this comment. I asked him if he thought that it would cause controversy and
> detract from the main point he was making, and he said that he did not think
> it would. I wasn't sure, but I said to go ahead.
> 
> I wish his hopes had been right, and not my fears.

I don't mean to cause controversy, but surely you expected me to ask 
about it? It gives the impression that you and others think that if some 
people are trusted to update the docs without review, then I shouldn't 
be one of those people. I think it's reasonable to ask why.

>>I seem to remember making a suggestion almost exactly like Myk's - that
>>people (specifically me, but it could have been anyone) be allowed to do
>>documentation whackage without review.
> 
> ... and how was it received? 

Badly. :-)

> Memory says that it was not looked on as a
> favourable idea. I know that my reasons for opposition were philosophical
> and not personal (as they are this time with Myk's proposal) but my
> recollection is that some specific personal points came up during the
> discussion, which was the basis of the above comment. If my memory is
> faulty, I apologize.

I don't remember any specific personal points. I had a discussion with 
Dave about some confusion over a previous docs update I did, but I can't 
remember him ever asserting that the *content* I added was bad, just the 
way I added it. And that's precisely what my proposal intended to 
clarify. But mayve I've misremembered too.

Gerv