Stream: t-compiler/wg-meta

Topic: meeting 2019.04.18


nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 17:59, on Zulip):

Hi @WG-meta -- Ye Olde Meeting Time

davidtwco (Apr 18 2019 at 17:59, on Zulip):

Ah, I didn’t get a chance to do the things I wanted to do.

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 17:59, on Zulip):

Heh, welcome to my life!

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 17:59, on Zulip):

But also -- I feel like we had a great, definitive meeting last week

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:00, on Zulip):

and I totally forget what we said

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:00, on Zulip):

I see this comment in there:

ok so I think this leaves us with the following "active work items" at the moment?

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:01, on Zulip):

It seems like our Dropbox paper hasn't really been updated

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:01, on Zulip):

But one thing I wanted to do was try to advance the contributor RFC

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:02, on Zulip):

I see we have a request from @oli to add the diagnostics WG

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:03, on Zulip):

compiler-team#54

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:03, on Zulip):

a few pending nits

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:04, on Zulip):

Looking at https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/pull/52

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:06, on Zulip):

I guess the major things not included yet are:

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:06, on Zulip):
nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:07, on Zulip):
davidtwco (Apr 18 2019 at 18:07, on Zulip):

Subtitle is more a property of how we display the membership than the membership itself. Unless you want to add it because it explicitly makes space for non-code roles.

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:07, on Zulip):
nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:08, on Zulip):
nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:08, on Zulip):

So, of these, I guess the trickiest one is @Vadim Petrochenkov's comment.

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:09, on Zulip):

I .. feel like a perfectly reasonable thing would be to drop back to contributor, but another option would be to better define the subset of members that are "active", or just...it's fine.

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:09, on Zulip):

I'm inclined to leave it as a Future Work

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:09, on Zulip):

just...it's fine.

by this I mean, it's ok to be a member who is not all that active just now

centril (Apr 18 2019 at 18:09, on Zulip):

@nikomatsakis Any thoughts on Eisenberg's comment?

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:10, on Zulip):

Like, why bother to formalize this?

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:11, on Zulip):

I guess the motivation gives the "very short" answer already

This proposal is part of a larger effort to introduce more structure
into the compiler team's makeup. This structure should make it easier
to become a part of the compiler team, by laying out a clear path to
membership and by offering more official roles.

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:14, on Zulip):

Something that is not in the RFC, but perhaps should be, is moderation

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:14, on Zulip):

In particular, I think that anybody with r+ rights has extra obligations, as a member of the org, is to be held to a higher standard when it comes to the CoC

davidtwco (Apr 18 2019 at 18:15, on Zulip):

some guidance when to add someone to contributor. I suggested the metric of whether they have "staying power", but I was finding it hard to articulate that more precisely when I tried to make the edits.

I think so long as it doesn't suggest that the only contributing factor to being granted "compiler team contributorship" is time, there's some element of a compiler team member suggesting someone is "ready".

davidtwco (Apr 18 2019 at 18:16, on Zulip):

I think it would be beneficial to track what we're working on with issues on the compiler-team repository that we can assign to people. I'd find it helpful for keeping on top of what I've been assigned and having somewhere I can post updates or questions.

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:16, on Zulip):

hm, so perhaps there are two criteria

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:16, on Zulip):

I think it would be beneficial to track what we're working on with issues on the compiler-team repository that we can assign to people. I'd find it helpful for keeping on top of what I've been assigned and having somewhere I can post updates or questions.

yeah, I like this idea

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:16, on Zulip):

maybe we can use the remainder of this time to create issues

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:17, on Zulip):

hm, so perhaps there are two criteria

does that sound plausible, @davidtwco? I could also leave it a bit undefined, as an "unresolved question" to be filled in with more experience

davidtwco (Apr 18 2019 at 18:19, on Zulip):

hm, so perhaps there are two criteria

Perhaps. In the GitHub comments you said:

if the person has completed 2 or 3 independent, non-trivial "projects"

I'm just not sure that there's a clear pool of potential projects that one could take on, in order to act independently.

centril (Apr 18 2019 at 18:20, on Zulip):

I think "quality" matters too; but that's mostly for team members to judge

centril (Apr 18 2019 at 18:20, on Zulip):

and breadth of knowledge as well

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

My only reservation was wanting to avoid the situation where someone who had been contributing regularly felt entitled to being a compiler team contributor based on how long they'd contributing (perhaps basing that timeframe on how long other people were contributing before becoming compiler team contributors), even if the compiler team felt it wasn't a right fit (for whatever reason). Some sort of wording that elaborates on that idea, that it isn't just a function of time, it's a decision that team members make too.

centril (Apr 18 2019 at 18:21, on Zulip):

not for people with r+ tho, I think breadth of knowledge isn't necessary for that; specialist knowledge seems sufficient

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:23, on Zulip):

So I wrote this:

It is hard to define the precise conditions when such a promotion is
appropriate. But the general sense is that someone is ready when they
have demonstrated three things:

[CoC]: https://www.rust-lang.org/policies/code-of-conduct

davidtwco (Apr 18 2019 at 18:23, on Zulip):

I'm don't want to appear as if I'm interested in trying to "gatekeep" who can become a compiler team contributor, I'm just a regular contributor like anyone else, I'm just trying to anticipate what problems could occur with a given wording.

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:23, on Zulip):

(I was typing independently)

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:23, on Zulip):

But I was debating if I should include an extra proviso

centril (Apr 18 2019 at 18:23, on Zulip):

@davidtwco don't worry; I think you are raising really good points!

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:24, on Zulip):

Maybe something like

However, it's important to emphasize that being promoted to
contributor is not a function of checking various boxes. There is a
remaining element of "readiness" that is harder to define (perhaps we
will refine the criteria above with more experience).

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:25, on Zulip):

Although I sort of feel like, if people fulfill those 3 conditions above, they probably should be a contributor

davidtwco (Apr 18 2019 at 18:25, on Zulip):

@nikomatsakis I think that's a good wording, it gives an idea of what qualities are desirable in a compiler team contributor, but doesn't make it a list of concrete criteria.

davidtwco (Apr 18 2019 at 18:25, on Zulip):

(and the follow-up paragraph too, that you sent while I was typing)

davidtwco (Apr 18 2019 at 18:26, on Zulip):

Although I sort of feel like, if people fulfill those 3 conditions above, they probably should be a contributor

I think in 99% of cases that'll be true.

centril (Apr 18 2019 at 18:26, on Zulip):

However, it's important to emphasize that being promoted to
contributor is not a function of checking various boxes. There is a
remaining element of "readiness" that is harder to define (e.g. such
as quality of contributions and breadth of knowledge,
perhaps we will refine the criteria above with more experience).

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:26, on Zulip):

I am wary of having talk that sounds like "cultural fit", which can be a bad sign

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:26, on Zulip):

Something I realize I might not have said -- did I write in this RFC how the decision is made?

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:26, on Zulip):

I don't think I did

davidtwco (Apr 18 2019 at 18:27, on Zulip):

Something I realize I might not have said -- did I write in this RFC how the decision is made?

Don't think so.

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:28, on Zulip):

Yeah, I'm going to add that

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:28, on Zulip):

I wound up nixing the extra paragraph but adding one sentence from it elsewhere

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:28, on Zulip):

Anyway, besides me live-editing, you mentioned making issues, @davidtwco

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:28, on Zulip):

Maybe we should spend a few minutes trying to dig into that?

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:28, on Zulip):

One thing that's been on my mind is the design meeting

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:29, on Zulip):

i.e., I think there's some work to be done yet trying to prep for that

davidtwco (Apr 18 2019 at 18:29, on Zulip):

I'm happy for us to do that. I think, perhaps ironically as wg-meta, that we could do a slightly better job keeping track of what we're working on.

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:29, on Zulip):

also, you were doing stuff with the out-of-crate policy

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:29, on Zulip):

that woudl be great, I'm just not sure if you know (or I know...?) what issues to open

davidtwco (Apr 18 2019 at 18:29, on Zulip):

I've yet to revisit that, hopefully tonight if I have time.

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:29, on Zulip):

I think though that I will make the final edits to this RFC and move it to the real repository

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:29, on Zulip):

You can open an issue for out of crate policy

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:30, on Zulip):

Maybe i'll open one for the design meeting and try to list a few steps

davidtwco (Apr 18 2019 at 18:30, on Zulip):

You could open an issue to gather thoughts and ideas about the mentorship proposal, that was one of the bulletpoints from last week.

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:30, on Zulip):

I think idealy we'd have an RFC for that too, but we can start doing it before it's all done. I liked the 4 week sequence proposal, we can start with that. We need a place for people to put proposals, and probably a (very simple) template

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:30, on Zulip):

You could open an issue to gather thoughts and ideas about the mentorship proposal, that was one of the bulletpoints from last week.

yes

davidtwco (Apr 18 2019 at 18:31, on Zulip):

Or just an issue to do it, so we can track that in our weekly meeting - triage the compiler-team issues.

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:32, on Zulip):

I opened compiler-team#56

davidtwco (Apr 18 2019 at 18:33, on Zulip):

and I compiler-team#57.

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:33, on Zulip):

I'm opening an issue for the design meeting notes

Pietro Albini (Apr 18 2019 at 18:35, on Zulip):

[I have some updates for the bots situation btw, will be able to talk about it in ~30min]

davidtwco (Apr 18 2019 at 18:35, on Zulip):

And compiler-team#58 which I've been meaning to do.

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:35, on Zulip):

Opened https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/59

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:35, on Zulip):

(design meeting)

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:35, on Zulip):

What's up @Pietro Albini ?

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:36, on Zulip):

Ah, right, we were going to talk about triagebot etc

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:36, on Zulip):

@davidtwco I am reminded we wanted to have some kind of "working group leadership advice" -- I'm not sure what the right steps are for that, but we should have an issue to talk about it

davidtwco (Apr 18 2019 at 18:36, on Zulip):

I'll make one?

centril (Apr 18 2019 at 18:37, on Zulip):

@nikomatsakis t-lang pre-triage?

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:37, on Zulip):

yep, I'm looking for my headphones

davidtwco (Apr 18 2019 at 18:40, on Zulip):

Do we still want an RFC for working groups @nikomatsakis? It was listed on the paper document.

davidtwco (Apr 18 2019 at 18:41, on Zulip):

We should also work out how to track topics like these.

nikomatsakis (Apr 18 2019 at 18:42, on Zulip):

I think it's a good us for us to define more precisely what a working is and isn't etc

davidtwco (Apr 18 2019 at 18:47, on Zulip):

I've created a whole bunch of initial issues.

Santiago Pastorino (Apr 18 2019 at 20:18, on Zulip):

@nikomatsakis @davidtwco @centril sorry for not being able to attend, on vacations :blush: :island:

Santiago Pastorino (Apr 18 2019 at 20:19, on Zulip):

just read what you’ve said and the meeting was great

Santiago Pastorino (Apr 18 2019 at 20:20, on Zulip):

100% agree with @nikomatsakis 3 points :blush:

Santiago Pastorino (Apr 18 2019 at 20:20, on Zulip):

seems like I can’t reply to a message on mobile

Santiago Pastorino (Apr 18 2019 at 20:20, on Zulip):

going to ping you guys about all this on monday

centril (Apr 18 2019 at 20:23, on Zulip):

@Santiago Pastorino happy vacation!

Santiago Pastorino (Apr 18 2019 at 20:25, on Zulip):

thanks

defunct (Apr 19 2019 at 03:24, on Zulip):

hey, apologies if this isn't the place. i'm new here but not to OSS development. I just wanted to say that i really think the effort being put forth to the WGs, documentation and the RFCs around contributions specifically for the compiler team, are great. It was actually @nikomatsakis blog post about "more than coders" that sent me down the path to taking a deeper review and ultimately ending up here.

lokalmatador (Apr 19 2019 at 06:03, on Zulip):

In reply to @defunct , same for me, @nikomatsakis blog post brought me here, looking for possibilities to contribute

Santiago Pastorino (Apr 22 2019 at 20:04, on Zulip):

@defunct @lokalmatador I've just arrived from vacations and saw your messages here, were them replied?

Santiago Pastorino (Apr 22 2019 at 20:06, on Zulip):

@nikomatsakis and I were talking about a learning WG you can check about it here https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/131828-t-compiler/topic/learning.20WG

Santiago Pastorino (Apr 22 2019 at 20:07, on Zulip):

unsure if that's your thing, but may be one of the places to contribute :)

Santiago Pastorino (Apr 22 2019 at 20:07, on Zulip):

the idea would be to build rustc learning materials

defunct (Apr 23 2019 at 17:58, on Zulip):

@Santiago Pastorino thanks for the reply and information :)

Last update: Nov 18 2019 at 02:05UTC