[Pulp-dev] RFC process
ipanova at redhat.com
Mon Feb 6 17:31:58 UTC 2017
I think all mentioned options could be used, but we need to have a starting
point. Something that would track a discussion for a long time.
And i lean towards ---> open a story/task (as a starting point).
Having a story/task opened we can always reference it in mail discussion or
Why i prefer to have all/most of the discussion happen on the story/task?
Because i cannot guarantee that i will not miss somehow the email or
etherpad. I actually often find myself trying to dig through dozens of
mails to find the right one. Same with the etherpads :)
Because i receive notifications when someone adds a comment on the
task/story, even after one month or two. This does not happen with
etherpad, and i actually will not see the new comments/ideas until i will
check the pad by myself.
Periodically. From time to time. Remembering the right pad number, and of
course i do not remember it, so i will need to dig into my mails to find it
Software Engineer| Pulp| Red Hat Inc.
"Do not go where the path may lead,
go instead where there is no path and leave a trail."
On Mon, Feb 6, 2017 at 4:59 PM, David Davis <daviddavis at redhat.com> wrote:
> One of the things that came up in our retrospective is that we don’t have
> a formal way to propose changes to our codebase and processes (aka RFCs).
> This was motivated in part by the recent discussion on merging forward
> commits on our pulp-dev mailing list.
> I'd like to maybe discuss a way we can propose RFCs and then document this
> process in our docs. It sounds like there has already been some discussion
> about how to handle RFCs so I apologize coming into this without having any
> Thinking through RFCs, I see two things to address. First is the actual
> format of the RFC. I see some RFCs in plan.io but it doesn’t seem like
> there’s a standard way of formatting an RFC. Should there be? For
> reference, here's the template for foreman RFCs. I think it might serve as
> a good starting point:
> Secondly, there’s the question of where to discuss and archive RFCs. Some
> possible options:
> 1. Open a story or task on plan.io
> 2. Use a GitHub repo to store and discuss RFCs (e.g.
> 3. Write the RFC on an Etherpad and once accepted, open a plan.io issue.
> 4. Just send out RFCs to the mailing list
> 5. Something else?
> I was thinking we could also use the mailing list in addition to options
> 1-3 by sending out an email pointing people to the actual RFC.
> Pulp-dev mailing list
> Pulp-dev at redhat.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Pulp-dev