Stream: t-lang/meta

Topic: how to proceed


view this post on Zulip nikomatsakis (Jul 09 2019 at 17:48):

So @T-lang/WG-meta -- I want to discuss how to proceed here. For various reasons we've missed a few meetings. I know that @Yoshua Wuyts will be on vacation starting July 11 and I expect to be traveling as well, though I expect to be online a bit. But I'd also hate for all conversation to stop.

I've got some notes I can turn into semi-proposals (I spent some time on that today). I could turn them into gists or perhaps mini blog posts. Still need a bit of work before they are fit for other humans to consume.

I'm wondering if it would make sense to try and carry on this conversation in some more async format. We could for example move to internals, or discuss here on Zulip.

view this post on Zulip XAMPPRocky (Jul 09 2019 at 17:54):

I would be in favour of this, not only for the points mentioned, the recent news around Zoom’s security make me reticent to continue to use it.

If we’re to continue async it might be best to outline some initial goals (I don’t know if this would essentially be what is in your proposals niko) that the group can divide the work between and work towards.

view this post on Zulip nikomatsakis (Jul 09 2019 at 17:55):

That makes sense. (I'm not sure what the Zoom announcements are, must have missed those)

view this post on Zulip nikomatsakis (Jul 09 2019 at 17:55):

What I was working on basically turned into a somewhat revamped staging proposal. I guess there's a mix of ideas, all things considered.

view this post on Zulip XAMPPRocky (Jul 09 2019 at 17:56):

https://www.theverge.com/2019/7/8/20687014/zoom-security-flaw-video-conference-websites-hijack-mac-cameras

view this post on Zulip nikomatsakis (Jul 09 2019 at 17:56):

It's not that different from the original blog post I guess

view this post on Zulip XAMPPRocky (Jul 09 2019 at 17:57):

The TL;DR is Zoom runs a local web server that any website can call to put you in a meeting with your camera on without your permission even if the app is not running or installed.

view this post on Zulip nikomatsakis (Jul 09 2019 at 17:58):

Disturbing.

view this post on Zulip XAMPPRocky (Jul 09 2019 at 18:01):

@nikomatsakis Once you’ve finished this post, what do you think the next steps should be?

view this post on Zulip nikomatsakis (Jul 09 2019 at 18:04):

A good question! I'm not sure of the answer. I think we have to basically get into some kind of "try and iterate" process

view this post on Zulip nikomatsakis (Jul 09 2019 at 18:04):

I've been thinking about that question of what the problems are we're trying to solve, goals, etc

view this post on Zulip nikomatsakis (Jul 09 2019 at 18:05):

A good question! I'm not sure of the answer. I think we have to basically get into some kind of "try and iterate" process

it seems like we might want to start getting more feedback from other parts of lang team, too

view this post on Zulip nikomatsakis (Jul 09 2019 at 18:06):

I am personally going to be on vacation from July 15 - August 9, though I expect to be online for at least some of that time

view this post on Zulip XAMPPRocky (Jul 09 2019 at 18:43):

My main question is how we iterate/prototype on these ideas. This is probably something that requires a larger discussion with the Lang team. My current thoughts are either mock RFCs (based on previous RFCs, these are only really useful to test the overall structure), or to find some low stakes RFCs to try the process with (This also has the problem where a low stake RFC probably won’t get the traffic to test its scalability).

view this post on Zulip nikomatsakis (Jul 09 2019 at 20:41):

Yeah, that's a good question. One other thing I think can be useful is trying to retrofit existing work into the schema.

view this post on Zulip nikomatsakis (Jul 09 2019 at 20:42):

I think that initially trying to work out what things look like for existing designs and RFCs is a good idea -- I remember that going over the error handling design felt pretty useful

view this post on Zulip nikomatsakis (Jul 09 2019 at 20:42):

Or I guess that's not quite what you meant with "mock RFCs"?

view this post on Zulip XAMPPRocky (Jul 10 2019 at 18:59):

No it is, I think to do mock we would have to use old RFCs as otherwise we would spend more time trying to think of a good topic to make a mock RFC.

view this post on Zulip Erlend Sogge Heggen (Nov 11 2019 at 15:37):

I've got some notes I can turn into semi-proposals (I spent some time on that today). I could turn them into gists or perhaps mini blog posts. Still need a bit of work before they are fit for other humans to consume

is any of this content available now? I'm trying to get a better idea of the managerial duties the Rust project need help with

view this post on Zulip XAMPPRocky (Nov 11 2019 at 15:53):

@Erlend Sogge Heggen I believe what is being referred to here became this blog post. https://smallcultfollowing.com/babysteps/blog/2019/09/11/aic-shepherds-3-0/

view this post on Zulip Erlend Sogge Heggen (Nov 11 2019 at 18:09):

Aah okay, in that case I’m up to speed, thanks

view this post on Zulip nikomatsakis (Nov 12 2019 at 15:09):

Well, I have a bit more :)

view this post on Zulip nikomatsakis (Nov 12 2019 at 15:09):

For example, I was working on HackMD that I called the Shepherded Project proposal

view this post on Zulip nikomatsakis (Nov 12 2019 at 15:10):

but I decided at some point I'd prefer to create a repository, project-staged-rfcs, to contain notes and documents

view this post on Zulip nikomatsakis (Nov 12 2019 at 15:11):

and I was working as a first step towards proposing a change to how lang team manages RFCs, introducing a more formal "pre-rfc" step; some intermediate notes are here but there are probably uncommited edits.

view this post on Zulip nikomatsakis (Nov 12 2019 at 15:11):

The rough idea was that I wanted to avoid having open PRs on the RFC repo unless it has a lang team liason-- I want those to be the set of things being actively discussed by the lang team, where engagement is to be expected

view this post on Zulip nikomatsakis (Nov 12 2019 at 15:11):

and I wanted to move "pending ideas" to another system, perhaps similar to the compiler team's meeting proposals

view this post on Zulip nikomatsakis (Nov 12 2019 at 15:11):

and then have the lang team have a regular meeting to go in depth in topcis, and one of the things we would periodically do is review those ideas when looking for new things to do, etc

view this post on Zulip nikomatsakis (Nov 12 2019 at 15:12):

I just got stuck with other stuff trying to draw up the exact wording there

view this post on Zulip nikomatsakis (Nov 12 2019 at 15:12):

I should really have taken it here first


Last updated: Jan 26 2022 at 07:47 UTC