[QGIS-Developer] Identify [feature] tagged reports that are not worth documenting

[DelazJ]

Hi,

The [FEATURE] tagged pull-requests are used to advertize devs of a new
feature but also populate both doc issue repo and changelog.
While the automatic issue report is really really great, not all the
[features] implementations are worth mentioning in the user manuals,
sometimes because it's a low-level feature eg and has interest only for the
changelog.
The side effect is that we end up with a growing queue in the doc repo and
i'm afraid that in the doc team we do not have all the background (I'm
referring at least to myself) to always quickly identify (and understand)
whether a feature needs documentation or should be closed as unresolved.
You can find an introductory list at
https://github.com/qgis/QGIS-Documentation/labels/ToDocOrNotToDoc%3F (still
incomplete as it needs someone to browse the list and weigh the interest of
the report - your opinion is btw welcome on those)

I guess, you devs might have some more ideas whether a feature you are
writing may be of interest in user doc. So could we imagine another tag eg
[no-docs] that will be added to the list of automatic issue triggers?
Actually it'll only be used along the [feature] tag to indicate that it's a
new feature (for changelog or whatever) but do not waste your time on
trying to write about in docs.

Does it sound a workable proposal? Anything better?

Cheers,
Harrissou
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.osgeo.org/pipermail/qgis-developer/attachments/20180621/449b362d/attachment.html>