For me the biggest advantage of RFC repo over design discussions on mailing list is that when you come back to it later, you immediately see the latest state of the proposal without any need for reading through the whole email thread. At the same time, when you what to see the whole discussion you can display the outdated comments and older commits. Sending/receiving comments in form of code reviews is quite natural for me, but that's matter of personal preference.
In my opinion both described issues (RFCs not being closed and design decisions without RFCs) aren't connected with github reviews but with the process around. Moving back to mailing lists won't help us with that. Therefore I'd keep RFC repo and rather work on defining how we decide on accepting/rejecting RFCs and who's responsible for keeping an eye on that. T. On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 9:52 AM, Tomer Brisker <tbris...@redhat.com> wrote: > Hello, > > About a year ago, we decided to try using a new system for discussing design > decisions prior to making changes, by creating a repo for RFCs [1]. Part of > the problem was that when discussing on the mailing list, discussions tended > to die out without a resolution, and eventually whoever wrote the code made > the decision (or not). > Since then, there have been about 30 proposals made in the repository. 22 of > them are still open, most with no activity for months. > So I feel fairly safe to say that this change has not led to the wanted > result of getting decisions made faster or with more discussion. A > significant part of the proposals have less then 10 comments, in many cases > all from just one or two respondents. Eventually proposals are still decided > on only when someone goes ahead, writes the code and gets it merged. > This has also led to some discussions taking place without all of the > developers even knowing about them, as it would seem most don't follow that > repo regularly, leading to repeated discussions when a PR is created. > In addition, some design decisions are still being made without going > through the RFC process, either by mailing list discussions or by people > just creating PRs without any prior discussion. > > I'm not sure what we can do to increase peoples' involvement in these > discussions, nor what would be a better way of making design decisions, but > let's try to figure it out since this attempt has not worked out as expected > in my opinion. > > [1] original discussion - > https://groups.google.com/forum/#!msg/foreman-dev/P9uRYV5K1Dc/xKMnzOOqDgAJ > > -- > Have a nice day, > Tomer Brisker > Red Hat Engineering > > -- > You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups > "foreman-dev" group. > To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an > email to foreman-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. > For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "foreman-dev" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to foreman-dev+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
