On 03/13/2017 07:10 AM, Tomas Strachota wrote:
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the whole discussion you can display the outdated comments and older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.
I also like the RFC repo. As someone that opened an RFC but never
'closed' it, it was mostly due to time, but I still plan to revisit it
in the future. I'm not sure that its a 'bad' thing to have open RFCs
(although we could auto close them after some months of inactivity).
Similarly on the mailing list you'd just end up with discussions that
never go anywhere.
I'd be interested in other proposals, but like Tomas said, I don't think
moving to the mailing list would solve many of the issues.
-Justin
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.
