-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 71
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
RFC: Label RFCs With Spec #108
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Forest Eckhardt <feckhardt@pivotal.io>
2f6744b
to
161fadb
Compare
This would be a great change! With the number of RFCs flowing in here, it's hard to keep track of what's applicable to my team. It would be even better if accepted RFCs could be grouped accordingly as well so users can easily go back and see all relevant RFCs for the Buildpack Interface, Platform, etc. |
Well, @kvedurmu you've got a spec change that needs some attention 😜 |
This is a great idea! It's really hard (especially for new contributors) to track all of the RFCs. Applying labels will help a lot! |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I like this idea. Once upon a time we tried labeling we subteam names, which are sorta-kinda-similarish, but gave up. I think labeling with the API is more useful to a broader audience.
Cleans up meta Co-authored-by: Emily Casey <emilykimballcasey@gmail.com> Signed-off-by: Forest Eckhardt <feckhardt@pivotal.io>
82f4e1b
to
35e58b1
Compare
I like this idea a lot and something that has come up when talking to our languages team at Heroku to make it easier to know what they should be reviewing. I believe there's some more detail that is missing. Who is responsible of labeling? Is that something we just do during the weekly WG on Wed? Also as an alternative or an addition, is it useful to label by "target audience":
|
- Change RFC file name to better reflect what it is actually purposing Signed-off-by: Forest Eckhardt <feckhardt@pivotal.io>
@hone I love the idea of adding the target audience in addition to API labeling. Let me write up something quick to include this as well as a process around labeling the RFCs. |
text/0000-label-rfcs.md
Outdated
# Implementation | ||
[Implementation]: #implementation | ||
|
||
During any Working Group meeting, when a new RFC is brought up it should at |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Should we try to do this during the weekly review of RFCs or would that bog that process down too much? Thoughts @sclevine?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
From the WG: we should be able to handle this as we go through the RFCs every week if you want to update @ForestEckhardt
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@hone Sounds good to me. I will update this when I get the chance.
Signed-off-by: Forest Eckhardt <feckhardt@pivotal.io>
Final Comment Period with merge disposition, closing on 7 September, 2020 |
e21b64b
to
bce2ac9
Compare
Co-authored-by: David Freilich <dfreilich@vmware.com> Signed-off-by: Forest Eckhardt <feckhardt@pivotal.io>
bce2ac9
to
c3f1e39
Compare
Readable