Thanks, Phil. Patches applied. This is all good stuff. — Rich Bowen rbo...@rcbowen.com
> On Feb 12, 2024, at 5:21 PM, Phil Steitz <phil.ste...@gmail.com> wrote: > > Sorry, last message got away from me. The point of the use cases is to get > a rough consensus of the kinds of things that a Sharpener will work on. > Ideally, these get a) fixed / better organized and b) fleshed out with > useful links, suggestions and scope of engagement statements. > > So for example, if "barriers to contribution" survives, we get into what is > / is not OK for a sharpener to suggest and when it is actually a problem. > More concretely, consider the case where "some people" think that project > Foo has an impossibly high bar for commit. How do you work out what that > means? How is it impacting the community? Both "not a problem" and "yes, > this is a problem" examples could be added, as well as some info on what > the Sharpener is allowed to question / how deeply they should engage in > tweaking internal PMC processes. > > Phil > > On Mon, Feb 12, 2024 at 3:08 PM Phil Steitz <phil.ste...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> OK, I added a brain dump on the use cases. This is in the spirit of "good >> ideas, bad code" ;)
