Feedback for 196-Dive_Into_UNIX_and_Bash.md#317
Conversation
| - [ ] 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. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Why? Any number would be arbitrary, it's just meant to serve as a way for people to highlight some commands.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
It felts weird to check this box when someones cheatsheet was
cd # moves directories:/
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Yeah, maybe this spec should just be removed then. Or added as a suggestion.
|
|
||
| - [ ] 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? |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@tannerwelsh I found it hard to find the list and descriptions of the exercises in the "Learn Enough Command Line to be Dangerous" book.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
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?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
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.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Re: partial completeness is tracked here: https://app.clubhouse.io/learnersguild/story/2132/weigh-all-specs-so-completeness-is-more-objective
3 participants
No description provided.