README.md: contribution about discussion by vbatts · Pull Request #104 · opencontainers/runtime-spec

vbatts · 2015-08-10T18:03:58Z

Leaning on aspects of golang's contribution
(https://golang.org/doc/contribute.html)

Signed-off-by: Vincent Batts vbatts@redhat.com

wking · 2015-08-10T18:19:38Z

On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 11:04:00AM -0700, Vincent Batts wrote:

README.md: contribution about discussion

This is missing the link to the YouTube channel and the discussion of
the 10-speaker limit which I'd proposed in #102. I think we should
point both of those out in whatever weekly-call documentation we
eventually land.

vbatts · 2015-08-10T19:53:05Z

eh? This is rebased on #102 which is in master now.

wking · 2015-08-10T19:54:53Z

I'd put the mailing-list section next to the IRC section. How about sorting channels to the front and usage to the back:
Mailing List
IRC
Discuss your design
Weekly Call
It would also be nice to standardize around “Title Case” or “Sentance case”, headers, since the current spec isn't very consistent there.

Fair, though honestly, process of discussion comes first in my mind.

On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 01:33:21PM -0700, Vincent Batts wrote:
Fair, though honestly, process of discussion comes first in my mind.
Works for me.

wking · 2015-08-10T20:18:01Z

On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 12:53:07PM -0700, Vincent Batts wrote:

eh? This is rebased on #102 which is in master now.

That rebase addresses 1, but the ordering I suggest in 2 applies
to the post-rebase version (1014b30). Or were you asking about
something else?

vbatts · 2015-08-10T20:35:20Z

@wking I think we're miscommunicating due to github freshness...

wking · 2015-08-10T20:43:51Z

Maybe “If there is a question” → “When in doubt”?

Otherwise it could read like you're pushing all questions (some of which might be better off as issues) to the mailing list.

wking · 2015-08-10T20:48:38Z

On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 01:35:21PM -0700, Vincent Batts wrote:

@wking I think we're miscommunicating due to github freshness...

Possibly. I'll try and quote enough context to avoid confusion in the
future.

I filed one minor rewording for 0088b641, and you might want to
replace ‘github’ with ‘GitHub’. But I don't feel strongly enough
about either to want to hold up on merging this PR.

vbatts · 2015-08-10T20:58:52Z

updated

wking · 2015-08-10T21:05:23Z

On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 01:58:53PM -0700, Vincent Batts wrote:

updated

646cdf6 looks good to me, although on the pedantic-copy-edit front,
I just noticed a “google groups” potential capitalization fix 1.

vbatts · 2015-08-10T21:10:43Z

pedantic. That is the word. :-)

On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 5:05 PM, W. Trevor King notifications@github.com
wrote:

On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 01:58:53PM -0700, Vincent Batts wrote:
updated
646cdf6 looks good to me, although on the pedantic-copy-edit front,
I just noticed a “google groups” potential capitalization fix 1.
—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#104 (comment).

vbatts · 2015-08-10T21:11:16Z

updated

wking · 2015-08-10T21:42:30Z

On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 02:10:45PM -0700, Vincent Batts wrote:

pedantic. That is the word. :-)

Measure twice, cut once ;). Anyhow, 7c67d5d looks good to me.

philips · 2015-08-11T04:10:17Z

lgtm.

Aside: shall we informally agree to just finish off the current design discussions that are "in progress" on GitHub and say new stuff goes to the mailing list?

vbatts · 2015-08-11T06:33:05Z

Some verbiage is needed around github issues that are effectively proposals
or design discussions.
On Aug 11, 2015 00:10, "Brandon Philips" notifications@github.com wrote:

lgtm.
Aside: shall we informally agree to just finish off the current design
discussions that are "in progress" on GitHub and say new stuff goes to the
mailing list?
—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#104 (comment).

wking · 2015-08-11T17:38:32Z

On Mon, Aug 10, 2015 at 11:33:06PM -0700, Vincent Batts wrote:

Some verbiage is needed around github issues that are effectively proposals
or design discussions.

I think the proposed wording pushes proposals and design discussions
to the list. What more do you want to add?

And I think keeping existing issues on GitHub makes sense. Migrating
them to the list would just fragment discussion. This PR should just
apply to discussions that start after this PR lands.

vbatts · 2015-08-11T17:40:17Z

@wking not so much migrating them. Defining what role github issues is to play.

wking · 2015-08-11T18:07:47Z

On Tue, Aug 11, 2015 at 10:40:18AM -0700, Vincent Batts wrote:

@wking not so much migrating them. Defining what role github issues
is to play.

I think “Issues are used for bugs and actionable items and longer
discussions can happen on the mailing list” covers that pretty well.
If you're reporting a typo, confusing sentence, or bug (things leading
to a semver patch release), open an issue. If you're suggesting a
change in semantics (things leading to a semver major or minor
release), post to the list.

philips · 2015-08-12T04:28:47Z

nontrivial instead of not-trivial?

philips · 2015-08-12T04:29:10Z

lgtm

Leaning on aspects of golang's contribution (https://golang.org/doc/contribute.html) Signed-off-by: Vincent Batts <vbatts@redhat.com>

crosbymichael · 2015-08-12T20:44:35Z

LGTM

README.md: contribution about discussion

vbatts force-pushed the contribution-updates branch 2 times, most recently from 1a136cd to 1014b30Compare August 10, 2015 19:51

wking reviewed Aug 10, 2015
View reviewed changes

vbatts force-pushed the contribution-updates branch from 1014b30 to 0088b64Compare August 10, 2015 20:34

wking reviewed Aug 10, 2015
View reviewed changes

vbatts force-pushed the contribution-updates branch 2 times, most recently from 6370cb2 to 646cdf6Compare August 10, 2015 20:58

vbatts force-pushed the contribution-updates branch from 646cdf6 to 7c67d5dCompare August 10, 2015 21:11

philips reviewed Aug 12, 2015
View reviewed changes

README.md: contribution about discussion
7e22d0d
Leaning on aspects of golang's contribution (https://golang.org/doc/contribute.html) Signed-off-by: Vincent Batts <vbatts@redhat.com>

vbatts force-pushed the contribution-updates branch from 7c67d5d to 7e22d0dCompare August 12, 2015 17:30

crosbymichael added a commit that referenced this pull request Aug 12, 2015
Merge pull request#104from vbatts/contribution-updates
7e4a877
README.md: contribution about discussion

crosbymichael merged commit 7e4a877 into opencontainers:masterAug 12, 2015

wking mentioned this pull request Aug 13, 2015
Add config validation and environment tests #109
Closed
2 tasks

wking mentioned this pull request Aug 30, 2015
Pushing discussion to the mailing list first: reword maintainer guide opencontainers/runc#189
Closed

vbatts deleted the contribution-updates branch September 10, 2015 14:50

wking mentioned this pull request May 19, 2016
CONTRIBUTING: Make leader-issues optional opencontainers/project-template#6
Merged

Uh oh!

Conversation

vbatts commented Aug 10, 2015

Uh oh!

wking commented Aug 10, 2015

Uh oh!

vbatts commented Aug 10, 2015

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

wking commented Aug 10, 2015

Uh oh!

vbatts commented Aug 10, 2015

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

wking commented Aug 10, 2015

Uh oh!

vbatts commented Aug 10, 2015

Uh oh!

wking commented Aug 10, 2015

Uh oh!

vbatts commented Aug 10, 2015

Uh oh!

vbatts commented Aug 10, 2015

Uh oh!

wking commented Aug 10, 2015

Uh oh!

philips commented Aug 11, 2015

Uh oh!

vbatts commented Aug 11, 2015

Uh oh!

wking commented Aug 11, 2015

Uh oh!

vbatts commented Aug 11, 2015

Uh oh!

wking commented Aug 11, 2015

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Uh oh!

philips commented Aug 12, 2015

Uh oh!

crosbymichael commented Aug 12, 2015

Uh oh!

Reviewers

Assignees

Labels

Projects

Milestone

Development

Uh oh!

4 participants