@T-compiler/WG-meta :wave:
@nikomatsakis you around for this meeting?
:wave:
Hey
sorry, was finishing up something
hey, no worries
So...
there are a few things going on, right?
I was going to ask if you had something outstanding?
the last two seem "related"
and it's actually an interesting point
great summary, I was writing those and you beated me on all of them :)
in particular diagnostics ICE breaker is important
i.e., we've thought of "Areas" as corresponding to directories, but I think that something like "windows" (or "target x") is kind of a cross-cutting concept
maybe we should focus on adding some new ICE-breaker grups?
it's not that hard
nikomatsakis said:
i.e., we've thought of "Areas" as corresponding to directories, but I think that something like "windows" (or "target x") is kind of a cross-cutting concept
yeah, I guess a mix of those is better
I would say diagnostics + windows
are two "no brainer" choices
:+1:
the problem with areas it's like is never ending :)
the other random thing is that there are a lot of MCPs now and I've not had any time to review or interact with them :P
yeah, it's hard to figure out how that should work
the only way I could thing is doing something that engages more people that know how to categorize this and add areas
adding ICE-breaker groups we can more or less do immediately
do we have a checklist for this
otherwise it's kind of a never ending task
if not, can we make one and put it in forge...
re: areas I think we should consider saying "this is not meant to be an exhaustive list"
i.e., what if we just create some areas that are obvious
we sort of have one, llvm
I'd say, why don't we have a specific meeting about that?
could be next meta meeting
agreed
maybe if you can use a bit more time than 30 mins
like 31
:P
lol
kidding but maybe it takes a bit more time
we could try to start a bit early and take an hour or something
done
then let's focus on ice breakers
(except I can't next week)
you were asking about a checklist
(but I could go longer)
you meant, next week let's start same time and go longer?
right
that is, a checklist
ok, going to change calendar
done
let me see the checklist
one good thing to do in this meeting is create issues
going to create the diagnostics one
ok, I'll make the windows one
also I guess we should close compiler-team#207
https://github.com/rust-lang/compiler-team/issues/282 created for ICEBreaker-Windows
the name "ice-breaker" isn't really that appropriate for that but oh well ;)
actually I wonder if..
so we have
O-windows
and O-windows-gnu and O-windows-msvc
maybe we should use O-windows as the label?
Diagnostics one compiler-team#283
we could rename the ICEbreaker groups to just "ping groups"
and maybe actually make one that is focused on ICEs and call that the ICE-breakers :)
what would the ping groups do?
they get pinged :)
I saw @RalfJ was confused about the meaning of ICE breaker in the sense that they thought it was something related to ICEs
for various purposes
yeah it's definitely confusing
I remember seeing a comment from them some days ago
I just like it too much :)
hehehe
but basically it would be like "ping groups are a lightweight way to help out"
window breakers and arm breakers are awesome btw
here is a list
strike force group :P
ooh arm-breakers yes
ok no
but it's funny :)
it's brilliant, it was @pnkfelix idea
arm-unbreakers
hehehe
arm-surgeons? xD
lol
anyway I am :+1: to renaming to ping groups
or something neutral like that
and I don't think making extra ICEBreaker- labels will be very helpful
e.g., we have A-diagnostics
so we can just re-use that, no?
we could make a separate label group for them
I mean we have ICEBreaker-Foo
labels
yeah, I guess it would be nice to think a bit about the name, a thing that I consider important is to not use a name that undermines the value that the work people belonging those groups do
I'm kind of arguing for removing them, I guess, or at least not always adding them
in particular I think that ultimately
ah forgot about that one
we could of course just rename the ICEBreaker-Foo labels
unsure what's the value of labels
yeah .. true
well to allow people search for them I guess
I think I imagined "oh people will want to be able to search after the fact"
but I think what I'm saying is,
for areas at least
we could have a label-ping the same way we do for wg-prioritize
I feel like it'd be useful to (a) have fewer of them oh dear god we have so many
and (b) be able to simultaneously tag the issue as A-foo and ping folks who like to fix bugs in that area
like, isn't that kind of what the "areas of the compiler" work is sort of all about :)
yes
and in that case it's definitely useful to be able to search later
it's great where every single thing is kind of the same problem :)
...great, that's one word for it
it means that things have gone through some thought :)
so, anyway, to bring this back to the present, I still think we want to add some groups you can subscribe to and get notified of things
I don't care too much about the labels, we could even remove them if we wanted and figure it out later...
agreed
i.e., I dont' want to let perfect be enemy of the good
+1000
we can revisit this after we think a bit more about all the areas of the compiler work and related things
btw compiler-team#235, I guess can also be closed
yeah, probably
I closed it, who knows
although I do think
@nikomatsakis unsure if you have something else but I guess about meta we can just try to move the ice breaker groups creation forward
it probably behooves us to periodically (say, once a quarter or something)
write a blog post that's like
"hey, these groups exist! you should join them!"
because nobody really reads CONTRIBUTING.md, do they?
yeah community management is important :)
really just a periodic "ways to get involved in the compiler" post is what I mean
yeah and in particular I think we just need to repeat the material every so often
i'll push more people towards joining the wgs :slight_smile:
ideally it would be great to constantly keep encouraging people, share things, ask for help and stuff like that
Santiago Pastorino said:
unsure if you have something else but I guess about meta we can just try to move the ice breaker groups creation forward
yeah I think the next focus for us should be this work of making ping groups for now, and maybe consolidating into a concept of areas
so... I guess the question is who's going to work on those issues
I wonder if we should try to advertise that
which issues?
Santiago Pastorino said:
ideally it would be great to constantly keep encouraging people, share things, ask for help and stuff like that
rust compiler community management I'd call it, from what I've seen some people do it, I've seen tweets from you, oli and others :)
yes, sometimes I do it, it needs a dedicated person
or 10
hehe yes
well we've talked about that in private some days ago
but yeah
i can help with that
I can try to take care of compiler-team#283
at least move a bit of that forward
but I'm kind of behind a lot of things
tomorrow is may 1st, here is a huge HUGE holiday
I think that for these groups--
well, at least for the windows one--
the rsutc-dev-guide chapters is probably pretty minimal
like, for llvm and for bisect etc, there was useful advice to give
but for windows..? I'm not sure what it would be
but I think just a placeholder that describes the idea: Help to test out, diagnose, and discuss Windows-specific issues
is fine
we should get involved @Esteban Küber about Diagnostics group, at least if we create the group he needs to be aware of it :)
lol uh yes
I guess by doing that Diagnostics will get a lot of help
I think that in this case we could write a useful chapter, but it'd be ok to leave it more "TBD"
from what I've seen in other ICE breakers groups
just mention that #t-compiler/wg-diagnostics exists
side note that...um...this exists
yeah, as you've said, that would not be perfect but would be good and better than what we have
nikomatsakis said:
just mention that #t-compiler/wg-diagnostics exists
this also ties with what you've mentioned about areas, labels, breaker groups and now we add working groups to the combo :)
can we get an alphabet for icebreaker labels? xD Icebreaker- seems to big :D
and anyway we will be renaming them
I think at some point it would be great to think about a better structure of areas, leaders, big projects, small projects, people that triage that areas and people that fix stuff in that areas
I guess people that triage those areas and people that fix stuff in that areas are our ice breakers (or whatever we want to call them)