Stream: t-lang/meta

Topic: rfc discussion model


view this post on Zulip XAMPPRocky (May 03 2019 at 05:50):

Hello all, I had previously written up a document about a new RFC discussion model and I felt that it related a lot of the topics that people brought up about the current process in the initial meeting. I would love to know what people think of it.

view this post on Zulip nikomatsakis (May 03 2019 at 09:44):

I'll take a look later today @XAMPPRocky and try to give more detailed feedback this time

view this post on Zulip Elahn Ientile (May 04 2019 at 00:32):

This is a great idea for an interaction model. It naturally separates the discussion into threads for specific aspects of the design. I'll help build it.

view this post on Zulip nikomatsakis (May 07 2019 at 17:52):

I like the idea of changing the basic structure from "statement" into "question"

view this post on Zulip nikomatsakis (May 07 2019 at 17:52):

I'm not sure if this is the right thing for all phases of the workflow

view this post on Zulip nikomatsakis (May 07 2019 at 17:52):

But I think it could well make sense in some cases

view this post on Zulip nikomatsakis (May 07 2019 at 17:53):

I am somewhat wary of building tooling before the "social" model, though

view this post on Zulip XAMPPRocky (May 08 2019 at 05:57):

Yeah, I agree that we shouldn't building any tooling yet. I think if we want to effectively change the RFC process we need to completely sure about how we model the discussion before we can implement it.


Last updated: Jan 26 2022 at 08:34 UTC