@erget and others, I have some ideas for how to improve handling contributions/associated processes and a few GitHub recommendations. Hopefully this is the right place to comment vs. opening a new issue.
This is from the perspective of a relative newcomer interested in making minor contributions to the convention docs. If similar suggestions have been made already somewhere I missed, please disregard. Mostly, these have to do with the current version of the [Rules for Contributions](http://cfconventions.org/rules.html) from the website and also [CONTRIBUTING.md](https://github.com/cf-convention/cf-conventions/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md). **Suggestions:** * link directly from Rules page to this repo and/or discuss repo to make it obvious where to file an issue/proposal under which circumstances - cf-conventions repo for proposed changes to the conventions and discuss for standard names and other CF matters (as it is now the doc mentions GitHub and GitHub issues but isn't specific as to the repo and doesn't provide any links outside of the page itself, which is not very helpful). It sounds like this may be in the works here in part, so ignore if so. This would make the Rules page much more useful! * update the README in both repos with a clear link back to the Rules page and/or CONTRIBUTING.md page(s). I didn't find any links to CONTRIBUTING.md outside of perhaps mentions in old issues, unless I missed them, and I think expecting new contributors (esp. those new to GitHub) to read that file is not reasonable. Both resources should be called out clearly in the [cf-conventions README](https://github.com/cf-convention/cf-conventions/blob/master/README.md). The [discuss README](https://github.com/cf-convention/discuss) does this in part but it could also link back to the Rules page. The README in the cf-convetions repo is also mostly technical and could use more repo usage/intent information to make it more informative. * add some means (such as an '@' team alias in GitHub) that allows contributors to directly communicate with the CF Governance Committee or some other appropriate governance team about dormant issues, and advertise this clearly in the Rules page, READMEs, CONTRIBUTING.md or elsewhere. At the moment, it's not clear to me as a contributor whom I should try to engage with about the status of my PR and/or issue. If an issue is created by someone and doesn't receive a moderator or discussion lags, what should the author do? It's not clear IMO. It would be helpful to describe where they can go for help or how to flag their issue for followup, and it might make the contribution process a better experience to newcomers and help grow the community. Teams could be created from the current membership in the groups from the [Governance page](http://cfconventions.org/governance.html) as a suggestion. -- You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread. Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub: https://github.com/cf-convention/cf-conventions/issues/257#issuecomment-635463149 This list forwards relevant notifications from Github. It is distinct from [email protected], although if you do nothing, a subscription to the UCAR list will result in a subscription to this list. To unsubscribe from this list only, send a message to [email protected].
