On 8 May 2014 01:59, "R. David Murray" <[email protected]> wrote: > > On Wed, 07 May 2014 08:09:03 -0700, Carol Willing < [email protected]> wrote: > > I'm wondering if "decision needed" might be more accurately named > > "triage needed"? > > > > Looking at David's well documented proposals and other mail comments, > > "triage needed" more specifically describes the 'state'. > > > > A few thoughts: > > > > 1. "Triage needed" would raise the importance and visibility of the > > triage contributor role. A positive for onboarding and growing > > development talent. > > > > 2. "Triage needed" is more descriptive and clearer than "decision > > needed" especially for those users that do not read documentation or > > understand the development workflow. "Decision needed" implies that a > > decision will be made to include or not include in a release. > > Realistically, decisions are made throughout the remainder of the > > development process based on time, resources, etc. > > I'll be interested in what others think, but to me "decision needed" is > closer than "triage needed". That is, the state means that someone other > than the person moving the issue to that state needs to make a decision. > That decision can be "Is this something we consider a bug? What releases > can we fix this in given our backward compatibility requirements? > Is this an acceptable enhancement? And any other decision that needs > to be made before the issue can move forward. > > All of these *can* be "triage" decisions, but to my ear it is the word > "triage" that is more about deciding where to allocate resources ("which > release"), whereas we generally don't work that way. We just decide if > it can go in or not, and if the patch is ready before the next release, > it can go in. > > More specifically, because I removed 'committer decision needed', > 'decision needed' covers the case of needing a committer decision, > which is by definition not a triage decision :) > > Perhaps 'committer decision needed' should be kept after all?
>From a work queue perspective, two separate states likely makes sense, since "Triage needed" & "Committer decision needed" are aimed at slightly different groups of people (with the latter being a subset of the former). That way, "Committer decision needed" becomes a clear avenue for escalation by triagers to the core developers when they need a design decision or risk assessment on a particular approach. That more structured mechanism should nicely complement the option of punting decisions to the collective wisdom (hah!) of python-dev & python-ideas. Cheers, Nick. > > --David > _______________________________________________ > core-workflow mailing list > [email protected] > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/core-workflow > This list is governed by the PSF Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct
_______________________________________________ core-workflow mailing list [email protected] https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/core-workflow This list is governed by the PSF Code of Conduct: https://www.python.org/psf/codeofconduct
