Re: On adding new APIs

2016-10-20 Thread Michael Dürig 



On 20.10.16 2:21 , Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:

On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 2:02 PM, Michael Marth  wrote:

...So I have a proposal: when a new public API is added the developer should 
drop an
email with subject tag [REVIEW] onto the dev list, so that others are aware and 
can
chime in if needed...


The Oak team can also just decide that new APIs are to be handled in
R-T-C mode instead of C-T-R.

It's kind of the same thing but using standard Apache terminology ;-)



But then all strictness of RTC is not necessary IMO. In many cases it is 
easier to commit, review and iterate.


My main concern is ensuring API changes get a broad enough review 
involving enough members of the team. The aim is to avoid island 
solutions driven by the need to fix a single issue in one place. We need 
to ensure the APIs evolve in a consistent and generally useful way. A 
good way of doing this is to involve other people in the discussion who 
work in different areas as this would usually widen the scope.


My proposal would be to still keep it informal but involve the dev list 
a bit more explicitly by tagging the subject either with [API] or 
[REVIEW] or even [RTC] if so desired. These tags should signal other 
team members to get involved even though the poster usually works on 
something outside one's area of expertise.


Michael

Re: On adding new APIs

2016-10-20 Thread Davide Giannella 
On 20/10/2016 13:02, Michael Marth wrote:
> developer should drop an email with subject tag [REVIEW]

ok for the email, but it should point to a ticket in jira where the
discussion would happen.

Davide

Re: On adding new APIs

2016-10-20 Thread Thomas Mueller 
Hi,

I would prefer C-T-R (commit, then review), because it reduces
bureaucracy. Except for changes just before a major release (when there is
little time to und or change things).


+1 to [REVIEW] emails. In my view, this should include new configuration
and new features. Basically all "important" user-visible behavior changes.
Sure, it's hard to say what is important and what is not.

Regards,
Thomas




On 20/10/16 14:21, "Bertrand Delacretaz"  wrote:

>On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 2:02 PM, Michael Marth  wrote:
>> ...So I have a proposal: when a new public API is added the developer
>>should drop an
>> email with subject tag [REVIEW] onto the dev list, so that others are
>>aware and can
>> chime in if needed...
>
>The Oak team can also just decide that new APIs are to be handled in
>R-T-C mode instead of C-T-R.
>
>It's kind of the same thing but using standard Apache terminology ;-)
>
>-Bertrand

Re: On adding new APIs

2016-10-20 Thread Bertrand Delacretaz 
On Thu, Oct 20, 2016 at 2:02 PM, Michael Marth  wrote:
> ...So I have a proposal: when a new public API is added the developer should 
> drop an
> email with subject tag [REVIEW] onto the dev list, so that others are aware 
> and can
> chime in if needed...

The Oak team can also just decide that new APIs are to be handled in
R-T-C mode instead of C-T-R.

It's kind of the same thing but using standard Apache terminology ;-)

-Bertrand

On adding new APIs

2016-10-20 Thread Michael Marth 
Hi all,

I had a discussion with Michael Dürig about adding new Oak-specific APIs for 
public consumption. There is a concern that these might be too “ad-hoc” and 
might come back to bite us later.
OTOH I would not like to add too much process or ceremony.
So I have a proposal: when a new public API is added the developer should drop 
an email with subject tag [REVIEW] onto the dev list, so that others are aware 
and can chime in if needed.

WDYT?
Michael