It would be nice to have more design docs with details on the system implementation. That would be a huge task though, volunteers are welcome! :)
Matteo On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 2:05 PM Sahaya Andrews <[email protected]> wrote: > I like the proposal. > > Along with that should we also consider writing documents for the > features already present? > > Andrews. > > > On Thu, Jun 8, 2017 at 1:13 PM, Matteo Merli <[email protected]> wrote: > > So far the discussion for large code changes (new features, improvements) > > in the project has happened in a very informal way. > > > > As a way to improve community involvement and also to have a better > > internal > > documentation I would like to propose to adopt the PIP model that many > > projects > > follow. > > > > Here, PIP would stand for "Pulsar Improvement Proposal" and would consist > > in creating design documents in the Wiki with a sequential id. > > > > The document doesn't need to be a super-detailed specification, but > should > > explain all the design points, reasons for choosing a determined > solution, > > rejected alternatives and allow for other contributors to understand the > > feature/change and to contribute as well to it. > > > > The advantage would be to have a preliminary discussion and gather > feedback > > on the design itself and also have the proposals there as a reference. > > > > In some cases the design has been discussed over "issues" or PRs but then > > later it's more difficult to understand the whole picture, since the > > information is fragmented. > > > > Opinions? > > > > Matteo >
