Stream: t-compiler

Topic: call for participation


nikomatsakis (Apr 24 2019 at 20:37, on Zulip):

I am contemplating creating a "Compiler team call for participation" internals thread.

The idea would be that we would post irregular "calls for participation" in there when looking for people to help out on specific tasks or to pick up specific bugs. I think we would probably accompany those with tweets or other attention grabbing efforts.

I imagine using this for a few sorts of things:

Thoughts? I'm not sure what the best venue is for this sort of thing, but internals seems ok?

nikomatsakis (Apr 24 2019 at 20:49, on Zulip):

(cc @WG-meta, this seems relevant-ish)

davidtwco (Apr 24 2019 at 20:52, on Zulip):

I think it’s a good idea. I don’t know that the triage meeting issues are necessarily the right issues to open to new contributors because they’re often higher priority and won’t often have things like mentoring instructions.

davidtwco (Apr 24 2019 at 20:52, on Zulip):

But there might be some where they are suitable, either way, I like the idea.

Santiago Pastorino (Apr 24 2019 at 20:53, on Zulip):

good idea and agree with @davidtwco too

nikomatsakis (Apr 24 2019 at 21:07, on Zulip):

Well, it depends

nikomatsakis (Apr 24 2019 at 21:08, on Zulip):

But I didn't intend for this thread to be just for new contributors

nikomatsakis (Apr 24 2019 at 21:08, on Zulip):

Or maybe even mainly

nikomatsakis (Apr 24 2019 at 21:08, on Zulip):

Sometimes the things we need for P-high issues though is to e.g. try and reduce or isolate a test case

Santiago Pastorino (Apr 24 2019 at 21:10, on Zulip):

I guess it depends on the issue, on the contributor and on the commitment of the contributor to be able to handle that with good timing if it's a thing with high priority

Santiago Pastorino (Apr 24 2019 at 21:10, on Zulip):

but I guess what is important is to clearly communicate when is the task due date

davidtwco (Apr 24 2019 at 21:18, on Zulip):

But I didn't intend for this thread to be just for new contributors

In that case, I think you can disregard my concern, I think this idea makes sense.

nikomatsakis (Apr 24 2019 at 21:25, on Zulip):

Maybe it'd be good to be clear in each case the "experience level expected"

nikomatsakis (Apr 24 2019 at 21:25, on Zulip):

we could have a little template or something

Santiago Pastorino (Apr 24 2019 at 21:25, on Zulip):

Maybe it'd be good to be clear in each case the "experience level expected"

also, at least for me, it's always good to know the expectations related to timing :)

Santiago Pastorino (Apr 24 2019 at 21:26, on Zulip):

it happened during NLL times that I was working on urgent things that I didn't know were urgent :)

nikomatsakis (Apr 24 2019 at 21:32, on Zulip):

Yes.

nikomatsakis (Apr 24 2019 at 22:10, on Zulip):

So maybe have a very simple template like:

varkor (Apr 24 2019 at 22:13, on Zulip):

does "timeframe" refer to how long we think the task will take, or how urgent the task is?

varkor (Apr 24 2019 at 22:14, on Zulip):

if the former, it might be nice to give a time estimate instead (though it's difficult to give) — or say what we think "medium" tasks might take

Santiago Pastorino (Apr 24 2019 at 22:15, on Zulip):

does "timeframe" refer to how long we think the task will take, or how urgent the task is?

how urgent it is, but it may worth noting how long the task may take

varkor (Apr 24 2019 at 22:18, on Zulip):

"Urgency" or "Priority" might be more descriptive in that case

nikomatsakis (Apr 25 2019 at 14:25, on Zulip):

https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/pull/71

Last update: Nov 22 2019 at 05:05UTC