Stream: wg-traits

Topic: renaming this stream


nikomatsakis (Mar 22 2019 at 15:47, on Zulip):

So, as came up in the "Minimal Specialization" topic, this working group often tackles issues that lie at the boundary of t-compiler and t-lang.

To make that clearer, I'd like to rename this stream to #wg-traits/t-compiler and create a second stream #wg-traits/t-lang (or maybe wg-traits/implementation and wg-traits/design). The idea being that the "t-compiler" stream is for implementation-focused questions, and "t-lang" more for "design-focused" ones, but that working group members would be expected to keep up with both. Alternatively, maybe we just want to have one stream (#wg-traits).

Thoughts?

(And, cc @WG-meta)

Aaron Turon (Mar 22 2019 at 16:52, on Zulip):

I'm not sure whether we need two separate streams, given that we have solid threading within them (and discussions often end up skirting the boundary). what about just #wg-traits?

varkor (Mar 22 2019 at 17:31, on Zulip):

one question is whether the scope is really more general than "traits" and if it would be worth naming it accordingly (e.g. #wg-types)

varkor (Mar 22 2019 at 17:32, on Zulip):

I think in general it makes sense to split design and implementation, but for now it's fair to say that a similar group of people are involved with both, so the distinction isn't so immediately obvious

nikomatsakis (Mar 22 2019 at 17:34, on Zulip):

I'm fine with #wg-traits, we can always add substreams where appropriate

nikomatsakis (Mar 22 2019 at 20:42, on Zulip):

OK, I renamed the stream -- though now I see @varkor's comment. It's true, it is in some sense a bit more genreal.

nikomatsakis (Mar 22 2019 at 20:42, on Zulip):

But I'm going to run with traits anyway :P

Last update: Nov 18 2019 at 01:15UTC