Stream: t-compiler/wg-meta

Topic: Meeting 2020.03.05


Santiago Pastorino (Mar 05 2020 at 19:00, on Zulip):

@T-compiler/WG-meta :wave:

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:00, on Zulip):

Hey @Santiago Pastorino

DPC (Mar 05 2020 at 19:00, on Zulip):

o/

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 05 2020 at 19:01, on Zulip):

today we had our check-in :), you've probably seen it on the other thread but anyway worth mentioning that I've created this doc so we can keep our status up to date :)

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 05 2020 at 19:02, on Zulip):

with the aim of making check-ins easier

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 05 2020 at 19:02, on Zulip):

anyway, related to our current things, what do you @nikomatsakis think we should focus on?

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:02, on Zulip):

good question

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:02, on Zulip):

I was just pondering it

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 05 2020 at 19:02, on Zulip):

would be nice to land diagnostics but that's on @Esteban K├╝ber

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 05 2020 at 19:03, on Zulip):

also, what about the major changes PR?, is there something we can do to move that forward?

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:04, on Zulip):

I'm looking

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:04, on Zulip):

the template is probably fine

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:04, on Zulip):

we could just land it

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:04, on Zulip):

but I think what we're missing right now

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:04, on Zulip):

is .. what happens when a major change proposal is filed?

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:04, on Zulip):

we could spend a bit of time talking about that

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:05, on Zulip):

there have been a few, right?

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:05, on Zulip):

I have a vague sense that

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:05, on Zulip):

we should (a) create a t-compiler/major-changes

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:05, on Zulip):

and we should have some kind of "FCP"

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:05, on Zulip):

basically: If conversation seems to die down

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:06, on Zulip):

we sort of summarize what was said and see if there's a vague consensus "for" or "against",

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:06, on Zulip):

then maybe we ananounce it in compiler triage meetings and wait a week or something?

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:06, on Zulip):

I mean this doesn't require all the checkmarks etc

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:06, on Zulip):

I feel like the goal is more to keep people aware and spark conversation

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 05 2020 at 19:07, on Zulip):

so you're saying that after discussing a major change, if things die down we should or accept or reject following an FCP process?

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:08, on Zulip):

now I'm thinking I should review the notes from the design meeting where we talked about this

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:08, on Zulip):

I guess the question is "should there be a decision"

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:08, on Zulip):

or is this just like "advertising" and no decision is needed

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:08, on Zulip):

maybe the latter is fine

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:09, on Zulip):

like, we let the decisions come from the PRs

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:09, on Zulip):

and of course if there's strong opposition

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:09, on Zulip):

I don't want a lot of annoying process we';ll fail to follow :)

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 05 2020 at 19:09, on Zulip):

nikomatsakis said:

I guess the question is "should there be a decision"

yes, and the decision could totally be, this is deferred until X date or until Y thing happens before

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:09, on Zulip):

but I feel like having someone "announce" a major change proposal (and then creating an associated stream)

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:10, on Zulip):

and then we collect those and highlight them at the meeting

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 05 2020 at 19:10, on Zulip):

nikomatsakis said:

or is this just like "advertising" and no decision is needed

what kind of advertising are you referring to?

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:10, on Zulip):

and maybe that suffices? if after some time there isn't anyone making a strong objection (perhaps we have a formal way to do that) we assume its implicitly "ok for now"?

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 05 2020 at 19:11, on Zulip):

yes

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 05 2020 at 19:11, on Zulip):

that seems fine

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:11, on Zulip):

@Santiago Pastorino ok so one option I'm imagining, to be concrete, is:

You want to make some "major change":

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:11, on Zulip):

(Of course, you can start doing work whenever, but we can't land the PR without that)

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:12, on Zulip):

(And similarly having done the process doesn't mean somebody won't appear on the PR with concerns)

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:12, on Zulip):

But it's just a way to give people a "head's up"

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 05 2020 at 19:12, on Zulip):

I guess it's important the explore part of your phrase

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:12, on Zulip):

By that I meant

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:13, on Zulip):

It should be interpreted as "nobody blocks this yet" not "everybody accepts this"

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 05 2020 at 19:13, on Zulip):

I meant, after nobody said that you can explore but at some point somebody can object and the work may never land

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 05 2020 at 19:13, on Zulip):

exactly :)

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:13, on Zulip):

the only thing missing then is like

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:13, on Zulip):

maybe it's good to talk about why someone might block

DPC (Mar 05 2020 at 19:13, on Zulip):

Could we integrate this with the tracking issue?

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:13, on Zulip):

Integrate what exactly with what tracking issue, @DPC ?

DPC (Mar 05 2020 at 19:14, on Zulip):

As in the change proposal is the tracking issue

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 05 2020 at 19:14, on Zulip):

nikomatsakis said:

maybe it's good to talk about why someone might block

I guess because people realize at some point that the idea is not as good as it was originally thought

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 05 2020 at 19:15, on Zulip):

could happen that somebody was not aware of the proposal but then they realized and are against

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 05 2020 at 19:16, on Zulip):

people from the community may realize about the change and come up with suggestions or ideas that make the proposal be not the best one

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:17, on Zulip):

right

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:17, on Zulip):

I guess I also just think

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:17, on Zulip):

if people haven't actively checked a box

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:17, on Zulip):

there's a good chance they were just on vacation that week :)

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:17, on Zulip):

etc

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:17, on Zulip):

not to mention of course that impl experience or further reflection may result in other kinds of problems

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:18, on Zulip):

ok, so I feel pretty good about this idea of "you have to advertise"

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:18, on Zulip):

I'm thinking about the tracking issue question, @DPC

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:18, on Zulip):

i.e., create a tracking issue on rust-lang/rust .. (or maybe compiler-team?)

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:19, on Zulip):

I kind of like moving some of this stuff out of rust-lang rust but either would do I suppose

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 05 2020 at 19:19, on Zulip):

nikomatsakis said:

there's a good chance they were just on vacation that week :)

yeah was thinking about that too, if people are on vacation they may not see but when they are back they may be against :)

DPC (Mar 05 2020 at 19:19, on Zulip):

okay go ahead

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 05 2020 at 19:19, on Zulip):

nikomatsakis said:

not to mention of course that impl experience or further reflection may result in other kinds of problems

exactly, that often happens

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:19, on Zulip):

design meeting notes

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:20, on Zulip):

so we had something different there

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:20, on Zulip):

what we said was

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:20, on Zulip):

seems like

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:20, on Zulip):

there has to be some positive review

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:21, on Zulip):

which actually makes a lot of sense

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 05 2020 at 19:21, on Zulip):

right

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:21, on Zulip):

i.e., the major change should have a kind of "second" and no objections

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:22, on Zulip):

ah well

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:22, on Zulip):

actually we were smarter than that

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:22, on Zulip):

I had forgotten about this

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:22, on Zulip):

the idea woudl be that for a major change to go forward

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:22, on Zulip):

it needs to also have a designed reviewer

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:22, on Zulip):

and that person acts implicitly as the "second" I suppose

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 05 2020 at 19:22, on Zulip):

yeah forgot about all that too

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 05 2020 at 19:22, on Zulip):

but yeah

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:23, on Zulip):

but this also helps to scale how many "major cahnges" we try to do :)

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:23, on Zulip):

ok, I quite like this

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:23, on Zulip):

so what is the "next step" to make it official I guess

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 05 2020 at 19:23, on Zulip):

nikomatsakis said:

but this also helps to scale how many "major cahnges" we try to do :)

yeah this is very important

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:24, on Zulip):

so the idea is:

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:24, on Zulip):
nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:24, on Zulip):
nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:24, on Zulip):
nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:24, on Zulip):
Santiago Pastorino (Mar 05 2020 at 19:25, on Zulip):

:+1:

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:25, on Zulip):
nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:25, on Zulip):
nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:25, on Zulip):

to help people note new ideas

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:26, on Zulip):

nikomatsakis said:

maybe we should just say: when a MCP is created, it is announced, and when it is "accepted" with a reviewer, that is announced too (or both at once if it moves quick)

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:26, on Zulip):

this gives people a chance to say "wait..."

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:26, on Zulip):

well, I think the regular thing should be to give a week, but you're allowed to move quicker if it's considered "small"

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:27, on Zulip):

Ok, do we want an RFC?

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:27, on Zulip):

to help make it feel "official"?

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:27, on Zulip):

at least we need to write up docs for forge, but I sort of lean towards an RFC

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:27, on Zulip):

I think it's going to take some "muscle" to make this work

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:27, on Zulip):

I am also thinking that the triage team should be somewhat involved...

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:27, on Zulip):

or at least there should be some folks who are kind of "monitoring" the process

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:27, on Zulip):

and "executing" it

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:28, on Zulip):

(side note: I wonder if "wg-meta" should just become the triage group)

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:28, on Zulip):

well, maybe not.

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:28, on Zulip):

I'm just thinking that I feel like we need some group of "folks who are executing compiler team procedures"

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:29, on Zulip):

nikomatsakis said:

or at least there should be some folks who are kind of "monitoring" the process

in particular, I sort of like the idea that instead of designating yourself as a reviewer, you tell the "fcp officer" to put you down, which also means they can add it to the meeting agenda, etc

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:29, on Zulip):

maybe we can automate that

DPC (Mar 05 2020 at 19:29, on Zulip):

I can help monitor those :slight_smile:

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 05 2020 at 19:29, on Zulip):

sorry, got distracted reading a bit :)

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 05 2020 at 19:31, on Zulip):

nikomatsakis said:

at least we need to write up docs for forge, but I sort of lean towards an RFC

agreed on RFC, I guess

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 05 2020 at 19:31, on Zulip):

nikomatsakis said:

I am also thinking that the triage team should be somewhat involved...

unsure I understand this

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 05 2020 at 19:31, on Zulip):

ahh after reading the rest I think I get it

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:31, on Zulip):

I was thinking about stuff like

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:32, on Zulip):

"this should be announced at the compiler team meeting"

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:32, on Zulip):

and how we make that happen

DPC (Mar 05 2020 at 19:32, on Zulip):

do these MCPs get FCPd?

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:32, on Zulip):

I think no

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:32, on Zulip):

or at east, not in the sense of everybody checks their box

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:32, on Zulip):

that's too much overhead

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 05 2020 at 19:32, on Zulip):

so ... I'm not sure if this should be triage, it's more like we need 2 groups

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 05 2020 at 19:32, on Zulip):

triage on one side and people executing and following compiler procedures on another one

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:32, on Zulip):

but I think the idea that "you should have a reviewer and approval from one other owner of the code"

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:33, on Zulip):

and "it should be announced and you should wait a time"

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:33, on Zulip):

so it's kind of like the check boxes, but you only need 1 to go, or something like that

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:33, on Zulip):

Santiago Pastorino said:

triage on one side and people executing and following compiler procedures on another one

yeah I realized as I was talking it's maybe different

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 05 2020 at 19:33, on Zulip):

yep

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:33, on Zulip):

earlier we were talking about having designated "officers"

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:33, on Zulip):

I think this is sort of what I mean

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 05 2020 at 19:33, on Zulip):

also that comes to meta is too vague

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:33, on Zulip):

and there'd probably be a "triage officer" or something

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:34, on Zulip):

(i.e., lead(s) of triage working group)

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:34, on Zulip):

Santiago Pastorino said:

also that comes to meta is too vague

heh yes

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 05 2020 at 19:34, on Zulip):

yeah, makes sense

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:34, on Zulip):

meeting time is over btw :) should we open an issue for major change procs and maybe summarize some of the key conclusions?

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 05 2020 at 19:34, on Zulip):

IMHO things look like triage and meta which should be compiler-procedures-wg

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 05 2020 at 19:34, on Zulip):

or something like that

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:34, on Zulip):

seems like next step is to try and bang out an RFC

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 05 2020 at 19:37, on Zulip):

do you want me to help in some way?

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 05 2020 at 19:37, on Zulip):

not entirely sure what exactly do we want to come up with but ...

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:59, on Zulip):

depends, do you want to try and write RFC? I had the feeling that might be arduous for you

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 19:59, on Zulip):

b/c lang barrier

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 20:00, on Zulip):

but maybe I'm just projecting :)

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 20:00, on Zulip):

I hate writing in foreign languages

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 20:00, on Zulip):

but you are much better at English than I am at any other language

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 05 2020 at 20:18, on Zulip):

hehehe :)

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 05 2020 at 20:18, on Zulip):

I guess it depends on how much work I'd take out of your shoulders :)

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 05 2020 at 20:19, on Zulip):

I'm not sure if it will cost me because of the language but if course that would add

Santiago Pastorino (Mar 05 2020 at 20:19, on Zulip):

may take because I'm not 100% sure about the process, what exactly we want to write and things like that

nikomatsakis (Mar 05 2020 at 21:24, on Zulip):

I may take a stab this today

Last update: Jan 22 2021 at 13:00UTC