By the way, how do you quote a snippet from someone?
Select the text and click the “Quote” that pops up 
Oh nice! Thank you!
The answer to those questions is “the amount of time to prepare a single layer” and “2”. Does that make sense now that you’ve solved it?.
@BethanyG we had similar issues at the JavaScript track so we stopped expecting PREPARATION_TIME to be exported and instead added a note for mentors to discuss Magic Numbers instead.
This sounds like a good change.
As an alternative, how do you feel about the language in the JavaScript track?
1 Like
I will take a think on the language this week. But I’m not interested in accepting a PR for it. My current rephrasing/thinking is below.
4. Calculate total elapsed time (prepping + baking) in minutes
Define the elapsed_time_in_minutes() function that takes two parameters as arguments:
number_of_layers(the number of layers added to the lasagna)elapsed_bake_time(the number of minutes the lasagna has spent baking in the oven already).
This function should return the total minutes you have been in the kitchen cooking — your preparation time layering + the time the lasagna has spent baking in the oven.
We don’t test that the students define PREPARATION_TIME — solutions will pass without it. We do have a note in the stub, but it doesn’t cite magic numbers.
I was going to add a note about magic numbers here in the thread and forgot. 
We could add mentor guidance for the exercise - although concept exercises aren’t really supposed to be mentored, since they’re much more targeted than the practice exercises.
I’ll take a think on whether we add a note for mentors … or maybe a clearer directive & link in the stub, rather than the existing “suggestion”.
Currently, I am leaning toward a note & link in the stub, and/or a note in the instructions.
1 Like
I mentor this exercise pretty frequently 
(and I often mention magic numbers)
2 Likes
Mentoring notes added to discuss magic numbers: Add mentoring notes for python/guidos-gorgeous-lasagna by IsaacG · Pull Request #2378 · exercism/website-copy · GitHub
2 Likes
(This was discussed briefly over on discord to prevent response slop here. Thank you for starting this conversation @ebanner)
Ah, I see. Yes, it does.
Something like PREPARATION_TIME_PER_LAYER would be clearer.
I like the PREPARATION_MINUTES_PER_LAYER naming 
Where in the discord was this discussed? I don’t see it (is there a hidden channel?)
Yup. In the maintainer channel. Bethany and I discussed my adding some mentor notes around this. The PR is the result of that discussion.
Oh, I’m guessing the maintainer channel is private?
Hm, which PR are you referring to?
Yes. It’s only accessible to maintainers.
Oh nice, thanks!
I know I didn’t create the PR, but since my question led to the PR, could I get some reputation points? I don’t know how reputation works (is it automated or manual?), but my goal is to become a mentor here, so I’m working towards that.
1 Like
Not really :) Reputation is automated and that’s not how it works. It doesn’t take very many rep points to become a mentor. You ought to solve a bunch of exercises (and get mentored) prior to mentoring on that track. Completing and publishing a reasonable number of exercises should give you sufficient rep points to become a mentor.
I see - thanks!
Apologies if I’m being pedantic, but I don’t see that solving exercises nor getting mentored earns you reputation…?
Does it earn you reputation but not listed there?
You receive reputation for publishing a solution for an exercise, depending on the difficulty level. Easy exercises are worth 1 point, medium 2 points, hard 3 points.
So to summarise this @ebanner, you merely need 20 easy exercises published, or 10 medium exercises published, or 7 hard exercises published, or a combination such as 9 easy + 4 medium + 1 hard.
The published exercises can be in any track. For example see my, Isaac’s or BNAndras’ profiles (for increasing published counts) how the points are spread over multiple tracks.
We hope you continue to raise points of improvement when you encounter them. Happy exercisming!