Merge branch 'stable-3.1'

* stable-3.1:
  ConfigSuite: fix example for setting config in test
  Documentation: Fix dev-contributing Q&A list items
  Documentation: Fix dev-contributing trail line wrap
  Document how the ESC evaluates design docs
  Clarify that non-maintainers can candidate as community manager

Change-Id: Idde5c95c1a1878d12aa35ff838f80912dc9da9a7

Documentation/dev-contributing.txt

@@ -267,34 +267,42 @@ meetings.
 
 === Evaluation
 Product/Vision fit
+
 Q: `Do we believe this feature belongs to Gerrit Code Review use-cases?`
+
 * Yes: Customizable dashboards
 * No: UI for managing an LDAP server
 
 Q: `Is the proposed solution aligned with Gerrit’s vision?`
+
 * Yes: Showing comments of older patch sets in newer patch sets to
   keep track (core code review)
 * No: Implement a bug tracker in Gerrit (not core code review).
 
 === Impact
 Q: `Will the new feature have a measurable, positive impact?`
+
 * Yes: Increased productivity, faster/smoother workflow, etc.
 * Yes: Better latency, more reliable system.
 * No: Unclear impact or lacking metrics to measure.
 
 === Complexity
 Q: `Can we support/maintain this feature once it is in Gerrit?`
+
 * Yes: Code will fit into codebase, be well tested, easy to
   understand.
 * No: Will add code or a workflow that is hard to understand
   and easy to misinterpret.
+
 Q: `Is the proposed feature or rework adding unnecessary complexity?`
+
 * Yes: Adding a dependency on a well-supported library.
 * No: Adding a dependency on a library that is not widely used
   or not actively maintained.
 
 === Core vs. Plugin decision
 Q: `Would this fit better in a plugin?`
+
 * Yes:The proposed feature or rework is an implementation (e.g. Lucene
   is an index implementation) of a generic concept that others
   might want to implement differently.
@@ -307,6 +315,7 @@ Q: `Would this fit better in a plugin?`
 Q: `Is someone willing to implement it?` (this question is
 especially important when reviewers propose alternative designs
 to the author’s own solution).
+
 * Yes: The author or someone else commits to implementing the
   proposed solution.
 * Yes: If a mentorship is required, a mentor is willing to help.
@@ -315,8 +324,94 @@ to the author’s own solution).
 === Community
 Q: `If in doubt, is there a substantial benefit to a long-standing
 community member with many users?`
+
 * The community shapes the future of Gerrit as a product. In
-  cases of doubt, the ESC can be more generous with long-standing community members compared to `drive-by` contributions.
+  cases of doubt, the ESC can be more generous with long-standing
+  community members compared to `drive-by` contributions.
+
+[[esc-dd-evaluation]]
+== How the ESC evaluates design documents
+This section describes how the ESC evaluates design documents. It’s
+meant as a guideline rather than being prescriptive for both ESC
+members and contributors.
+
+=== General Process
+As part of the design process, the ESC makes a final decision if a
+design gets to be implemented. If there are multiple alternative
+solutions, the ESC will decide which solution can be implemented.
+
+The ESC should wait until all contributors had the chance to
+voice their opinion in review comments or by proposing alternative
+solutions. Due to the infrequent ESC meetings (every 2-4 weeks)
+the ESC might discuss documents in cases where the discussion is
+already advanced far enough, but not make a decision yet. In this
+case, contributors can still voice concerns or discuss alternatives.
+The decision can be at the next meeting or via email in between
+meetings.
+
+=== Evaluation
+Product/Vision fit
+
+Q: `Do we believe this feature belongs to Gerrit Code Review use-cases?`
+
+* Yes: Customizable dashboards
+* No: UI for managing an LDAP server
+
+Q: `Is the proposed solution aligned with Gerrit’s vision?`
+
+* Yes: Showing comments of older patch sets in newer patch sets to
+  keep track (core code review)
+* No: Implement a bug tracker in Gerrit (not core code review).
+
+=== Impact
+Q: `Will the new feature have a measurable, positive impact?`
+
+* Yes: Increased productivity, faster/smoother workflow, etc.
+* Yes: Better latency, more reliable system.
+* No: Unclear impact or lacking metrics to measure.
+
+=== Complexity
+Q: `Can we support/maintain this feature once it is in Gerrit?`
+
+* Yes: Code will fit into codebase, be well tested, easy to
+  understand.
+* No: Will add code or a workflow that is hard to understand
+  and easy to misinterpret.
+
+Q: `Is the proposed feature or rework adding unnecessary complexity?`
+
+* Yes: Adding a dependency on a well-supported library.
+* No: Adding a dependency on a library that is not widely used
+  or not actively maintained.
+
+=== Core vs. Plugin decision
+Q: `Would this fit better in a plugin?`
+
+* Yes:The proposed feature or rework is an implementation (e.g. Lucene
+  is an index implementation) of a generic concept that others
+  might want to implement differently.
+* Yes: The proposed feature or rework is very specific to a custom setup.
+* No: The proposed feature or rework is applicable to a wider user
+  base.
+* No: The proposed feature or rework is a `core code review feature`.
+
+=== Commitment
+Q: `Is someone willing to implement it?` (this question is
+especially important when reviewers propose alternative designs
+to the author’s own solution).
+
+* Yes: The author or someone else commits to implementing the
+  proposed solution.
+* Yes: If a mentorship is required, a mentor is willing to help.
+* No: Unclear ownership, mentorship or implementation plan.
+
+=== Community
+Q: `If in doubt, is there a substantial benefit to a long-standing
+community member with many users?`
+
+* The community shapes the future of Gerrit as a product. In
+  cases of doubt, the ESC can be more generous with long-standing
+  community members compared to `drive-by` contributions.
 
 GERRIT
 ------

java/com/google/gerrit/testing/ConfigSuite.java

@@ -58,6 +58,7 @@ import org.junit.runners.model.InitializationError;
  *   public static Config firstConfig() {
  *     Config cfg = new Config();
  *     cfg.setString("gerrit", null, "testValue", "a");
+ *     return cfg;
  *   }
  * }
  *
@@ -66,6 +67,7 @@ import org.junit.runners.model.InitializationError;
  *   public static Config secondConfig() {
  *     Config cfg = new Config();
  *     cfg.setString("gerrit", null, "testValue", "b");
+ *     return cfg;
  *   }
  *
  *   {@literal @}Test