Skip to content
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

Explicit text about proposal scope, goals as a part of phase 1? #739

Open
dtig opened this issue Mar 17, 2021 · 4 comments
Open

Explicit text about proposal scope, goals as a part of phase 1? #739

dtig opened this issue Mar 17, 2021 · 4 comments
Labels
process Issues concerning the documents in the process directory.

Comments

@dtig
Copy link
Member

dtig commented Mar 17, 2021

Our current phases process doesn't require discussions or text about proposal scope. Should we explicitly call out scope, and/or goals of a proposal in the phases document, possibly as one of the exit criteria for phase 1?

For some proposals the scope is fairly straightforward (SIMD for example), others could benefit from some explicit documented scope. The advantages of doing so would be:

  • For larger, ambiguous problem spaces, having explicit discussions about scope may streamline some of the design discussions
  • Useful for newer folks trying to contribute that may not have all the historical context. The context in general is hard to track down as it can be spread across different meetings that are not linked to the relevant issues.
@tlively
Copy link
Member

tlively commented Mar 17, 2021

This seems very reasonable and useful to me as an exit criterion for phase 1. Would we just require that scope/goals/requirements are documented and leave it to the CG to interpret that, or would we be more specific about the kind of documentation we would like to see? I'd be fine either way.

@fgmccabe
Copy link
Collaborator

Should be no surprise that I agree wholeheartedly.
BTW, it is not obvious to me that SIMD's scope is so straightforward!

@ngzhian
Copy link
Member

ngzhian commented Mar 17, 2021

Agree, calling out goals and non-goals in the overview document will help focus the proposal. It also sounds reasonable for a Phase 1 exit. (The goals and non-goals don't have to be immutable, as proposals advance through the stages there will be more discussion generated and more people involved, and the goals/non-goals should be updated along the way.)

@dtig
Copy link
Member Author

dtig commented Mar 17, 2021

This seems very reasonable and useful to me as an exit criterion for phase 1. Would we just require that scope/goals/requirements are documented and leave it to the CG to interpret that, or would we be more specific about the kind of documentation we would like to see? I'd be fine either way.

I think leaving it to the CG to interpret makes sense to me as it is possible that this would vary for different proposals, just that this is something we should evaluate during phase 1.

Forgot to add cc @RossTate for suggesting this recently.

@sunfishcode sunfishcode added the process Issues concerning the documents in the process directory. label Mar 15, 2024
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
process Issues concerning the documents in the process directory.
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants