Skip to content

Feedback for 196-Dive_Into_UNIX_and_Bash.md #317

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.

Sign up for GitHub

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

Open
jaredatron wants to merge 1 commit into
base: master
Choose a base branch
from
Open

Feedback for 196-Dive_Into_UNIX_and_Bash.md #317

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
1 commit
Select commit
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
6 changes: 6 additions & 0 deletions _goals/196-Dive_Into_UNIX_and_Bash.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -61,6 +61,9 @@ Indulge your curiousity and explore the questions that pique your interest.
## Specifications

- [ ] Artifact is a GitHub repo.

__FEEDBACK:__ Specs like the two below are super hard to verify. It requires a ton of reading. Its hard to find the 20 exercies or activities. When they've only done 17 of the 20, how do you count that toward completeness? Since this is one checkbox is it pass/fail? Do we have an example of an artifact that meets 100% completeness?

@tannerwelsh tannerwelsh Apr 18, 2017

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Specs like the two below are super hard to verify. It requires a ton of reading. Its hard to find the 20 exercies or activities.

That's the intent behind the next spec "Solution code for each exercise is included in its own bash file (*.sh)." Why are these hard to find?

When they've only done 17 of the 20, how do you count that toward completeness? Since this is one checkbox is it pass/fail?

Right now, it's 20 or nothing: pass/fail. These could be rewritten to make it more of a scale though.

Do we have an example of an artifact that meets 100% completeness?

I have no idea. Ideally every goal would have a "canonical" solution. But I don't think it's a high priority at the moment.

@jaredatron jaredatron Apr 18, 2017

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

@tannerwelsh I found it hard to find the list and descriptions of the exercises in the "Learn Enough Command Line to be Dangerous" book.

@jaredatron jaredatron Apr 18, 2017 •
edited
Loading

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Right now, it's 20 or nothing: pass/fail. These could be rewritten to make it more of a scale though.

I've spoken to several coaches and they've been giving partial credit to specs like these in cases when 17/20 of the spec is completed. Should we draw up a "Completeness Review Guide" to clarify this? Maybe put it in the playbook?

@tannerwelsh tannerwelsh Apr 20, 2017

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

I found it hard to find the list and descriptions of the exercises in the "Learn Enough Command Line to be Dangerous" book.

Could this be addressed by adding a spec "Exercise descriptions are included as comments in the solution files"? That way you don't have to look at the book at all.

@tannerwelsh tannerwelsh Apr 20, 2017

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Re: partial completeness is tracked here: https://app.clubhouse.io/learnersguild/story/2132/weigh-all-specs-so-completeness-is-more-objective


- [ ] 20 exercises are completed from the ["Learn Enough Command Line to be Dangerous"][hartl-command-line] book.
- [ ] Solution code for each exercise is included in its own bash file (`*.sh`).
- [ ] Solution code for exercises are stored in a `command-line/` directory of your artifact repo.
Expand All @@ -69,6 +72,9 @@ Indulge your curiousity and explore the questions that pique your interest.
- [ ] Solution code for each activity is included in its own bash file (`*.sh`). **Tip**: for the bash-scripting tutorials, check your solutions by executing your bash (.sh) files (type their name in the terminal), instead of writing code directly in the terminal.
- [ ] Solution code for activities are stored in a `bash-scripting/` directory of your artifact repo.
- [ ] Solution code for each activity includes a comment with the prompt text for the activity.

__FEEDBACK:__ The spec below should require a certain number of entries in said cheatsheet.

@tannerwelsh tannerwelsh Apr 18, 2017

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Why? Any number would be arbitrary, it's just meant to serve as a way for people to highlight some commands.

@jaredatron jaredatron Apr 18, 2017

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

It felts weird to check this box when someones cheatsheet was

cd # moves directories

:/

@tannerwelsh tannerwelsh Apr 20, 2017

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

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

Yeah, maybe this spec should just be removed then. Or added as a suggestion.


- [ ] Cheat sheet of your favorite useful commands and a brief explanation of what they do is included in the artifact as a `cheat-sheet.md` file.
- [ ] All major features are added via pull requests with a clear description and concise commit messages.
- [ ] Code uses a linter and there are no linting errors.
Expand Down