So @Josh Triplett and I were talking over what we need to keep the lang team procedure moving. Things have been somewhat stalled in part because the foundation effort and other things are taking up like 125% of my time.
One of the things we said to ourselves is that project groups just feel too heavy weight for a lot of things -- but the core idea of designing a project feels right.
The main distinction being:
here are some notes I made
- Act on pending charters: - Merge the charter doc - Create a representative issue - Create a Zulip stream - t-lang/project-xyz? - Create a repository to use for storing RFC draft - also to link issues and things related to implementation - based on https://github.com/rust-lang/project-group-template - ping Erin about deleting the meetings - and figure out what kind of “bless” is needed from infra - Probably need support from team repo - need a way to make a file that hides it from the “governance” page but is just used for administering permissions to a repository - Separate out making a group - To do that, you should come with “proof of work” - active membership of >=3 people - history of regular updates to the lang-team - blog post explaining the effort - Teams repo?
curse Zulip's nested list item support
basically the idea is that a "project" consists of a tracking issue, a Zulip stream, and a repo for the RFC draft
but one thing we do still need is who will have access to that repo. per our access policy we'd like to centralize that on the teams repo.
we could create a hidden team for this, it's a bit annoying
anyway the tl;dr is that I plan to do this for "declarative macro rep counts" (https://github.com/rust-lang/lang-team/pull/45), cc @Mark Thomas and @Lokathor, I am so sorry for the delays
I guess we could conceivably use the lang-team repo for those draft RFCs
(I'm curious @Josh Triplett what you think of that, one downside is that folks wouldn't get the ability to merge their own PRs, but maybe that's ok :)
like maybe we just have a
projects folder with a
/rfc.md and so forth?
and in some cases it'll redirect to its own repo if that seems warranted
I guess a downside is you can't "watch" the repo
drafts in the lang team repo seems fine for smaller projects
it's all unofficial until the rfc is PR'd to the rfcs repo anyway
I can certainly set it up
and we can consider if it works ok
I like that it's something we can look at in the triage meeting, too
i.e., we can search for PRs and make people aware of them
should be doing that anyway
I think the best workflow would be that a person just sets up a branch which they freely edit until they decide it needs feedback, and then they PR to the
main branch, which automatically T-lang would see and be able to review as one of:
I do think there's a huge amount of value in groups being able to manage their own PRs to an RFC in progress.
I've seen that work very well on multiple project groups.
Yes, it does work well
yeah, the actual PR to the rfcs repo should be a project group's action.
I'd mostly like to see groups just work in a branch of lang-team so that there's less places to look around for all these things going on. Too many places seems harmful to the ability to keep track of it all.
@Lokathor I think part of the issue is that it's intended to not all be kept-track-of, only the groups you're actually a part of. :)
Well I think that's actually a weakness of the system. There's often conversations on the Community Discord that are essentially:
"hey what's the story with X?"
"I think a group works on that maybe."
"How do I find out more?"
"Probably github, but I don't know."
And I think it's unfortunate when we can't quickly filter the attention of newcomers into useful activity. So it does not have to be extremely regulated, but a better understood way of finding things is great, and one way to get that is to simply have less places that you even need to check.
let's just try using lang-team repo to start
and see how it goes
and if groups request a separate repo, we'll make it
btw @XAMPPRocky I was looking at your template for project groups and it's really nice <3
Last updated: Jan 26 2022 at 07:47 UTC