Re: [Framework-Team] PLIP process

2020-06-10 Thread Maik, Derstappen 
Am 09.06.20 um 17:45 schrieb Alessandro Pisa:
> On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 at 16:02, Eric Bréhault  wrote:
>> Here is the PLIP process description I propose:
>>
>> - As decided at the Ferrara Plone conference, a PLIP can now be submitted 
>> and approved without an implementer or without an implementation description 
>> (our objective is to encourage people to submit interesting idea even though 
>> they can't implement it themselves).
>> - The FWT approval is about the feature. Is it interesting? Is it making 
>> Plone better? Does it deserve to be in core? But it does not imply the FWT 
>> approval regarding the implementation.
>> - When a PLIP is implemented, the FWT assigns one of the members as 
>> champion, the champion will provide support to the implementer, verify the 
>> code implementation, test the feature, and check the documentation. If the 
>> champion has a doubt, the rest of the FWT can be involved in teh review 
>> process.
>> - If the PLIP review is satisfactory, the PLIP is merged.
>>
>> Important remark: When the FWT approaches a PLIP, it is assigned to a Plone 
>> version. But it is only indicative, if the implementation is delayed, or is 
>> not satisfactory, the PLIP might be moved to a future version. A pending 
>> PLIP cannot be a blocker for a release (unless a team decided otherwise 
>> specifically).
>>
>> Opinions?
> Everything reasonable and does not sound new :)
> Thanks for writing that down.
>
> Other interesting things:
> - https://docs.plone.org/develop/coredev/docs/plipreview.html
>
> I was not able to quickly find the template to review a PLIP, anyway
> those can be used an example:
>
> - https://github.com/plone/buildout.coredev/tree/5.2/plips/reviews
>
> Ciao e grazie!
+1

thx for the work and the infos's.
BTW maybe we should pulish the reviews also on the community.plone.org
or even on plone.org somewhere.
This is important stuff and helps others to understand how things are
handled.

cheers, Maik

___
Framework-Team mailing list
framework-t...@lists.plone.org
https://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/plone-framework-team

Re: [Framework-Team] PLIP process

2020-06-09 Thread Alessandro Pisa 
On Tue, 9 Jun 2020 at 16:02, Eric Bréhault  wrote:
>
> Here is the PLIP process description I propose:
>
> - As decided at the Ferrara Plone conference, a PLIP can now be submitted and 
> approved without an implementer or without an implementation description (our 
> objective is to encourage people to submit interesting idea even though they 
> can't implement it themselves).
> - The FWT approval is about the feature. Is it interesting? Is it making 
> Plone better? Does it deserve to be in core? But it does not imply the FWT 
> approval regarding the implementation.
> - When a PLIP is implemented, the FWT assigns one of the members as champion, 
> the champion will provide support to the implementer, verify the code 
> implementation, test the feature, and check the documentation. If the 
> champion has a doubt, the rest of the FWT can be involved in teh review 
> process.
> - If the PLIP review is satisfactory, the PLIP is merged.
>
> Important remark: When the FWT approaches a PLIP, it is assigned to a Plone 
> version. But it is only indicative, if the implementation is delayed, or is 
> not satisfactory, the PLIP might be moved to a future version. A pending PLIP 
> cannot be a blocker for a release (unless a team decided otherwise 
> specifically).
>
> Opinions?

Everything reasonable and does not sound new :)
Thanks for writing that down.

Other interesting things:
- https://docs.plone.org/develop/coredev/docs/plipreview.html

I was not able to quickly find the template to review a PLIP, anyway
those can be used an example:

- https://github.com/plone/buildout.coredev/tree/5.2/plips/reviews

Ciao e grazie!
-- 
@ale_pisa - http://ale-rt.github.io - http://alepisa.blogspot.com -
https://it.linkedin.com/in/apisa
___
Framework-Team mailing list
framework-t...@lists.plone.org
https://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/plone-framework-team

Re: [Framework-Team] PLIP Process

2015-11-25 Thread Eric Bréhault 
+1 for http://issuetemplate.com/#/plone/Products.CMFPlone/PLIP

On Wed, Nov 25, 2015 at 3:39 PM, Franco Pellegrini 
wrote:

> On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 11:52 AM Ramon Navarro Bosch 
> wrote:
>
>> What about using this :
>> http://issuetemplate.com/#/plone/Products.CMFPlone/PLIP
>>
>
> I like this!
>
>
>>
>> I would disconect dev.plone.org and use the new plone.org (that is going
>> to be online soon) to add the info we have at
>>
>> https://github.com/plone/buildout.coredev/tree/5.0/docs
>>
>>
> I would also disconnect dev.plone.org so it no longer points to the Trac
> system, and instead (and I think this is what Johannes meant) would have
> dev.plone.org to either be or look like a subsection of plone.org with
> all the relevant information for Plone developers
>
>
>> Ramon
>>
>>
> Cheers,
> Franco
>
> ___
> Framework-Team mailing list
> framework-t...@lists.plone.org
> https://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/plone-framework-team
>
>
___
Framework-Team mailing list
framework-t...@lists.plone.org
https://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/plone-framework-team

Re: [Framework-Team] PLIP Process

2015-11-25 Thread Jens W. Klein 
After some discussion I introduced the label "03 type: feature" exactly
for plips.
After some discussion the more general word "feature" was preferred and
I renamed it (I first named it "03 type: plip", but after discussions
first at at community.plone.org and then at 2015 conference we renamed it).

Enhancement is a small change with no need to PLIP.

On 2015-11-24 15:52, Ramon Navarro Bosch wrote:
> What about using this
> : http://issuetemplate.com/#/plone/Products.CMFPlone/PLIP

I did not know about issuetemplate, thats really great! Gets a +1 by me.

If we decide to use issuetemplate I propose add a short note about it to
http://docs.plone.org/develop/coredev/docs/guidelines.html and the
longer explanation to http://docs.plone.org/develop/coredev/docs/plips.html

> I would disconect dev.plone.org  and use the new
> plone.org  (that is going to be online soon) to add
> the info we have at 
> 
> https://github.com/plone/buildout.coredev/tree/5.0/docs

Afaik there were already some date announced (Dec.31st?) when
dev.plone.org will be shut down.

Jens

> Ramon
> 
> El dt., 24 nov. 2015 a les 14:59, Johannes Raggam ( >) va escriure:
> 
> Sorry, next FWT is December 1st, not today.
> 
> 
> 
> On 11/24/2015 02:54 PM, Johannes Raggam wrote:
> > Let's discuss that at the meeting. Anyways, my position:
> >
> >
> > Yes, there was a decision to give up dev.plone.org
>  and use github issues
> > instead. IIRC, maurits' already made some kind-of plips:
> >
> > https://github.com/plone/Products.CMFPlone/issues/1008
> > https://github.com/plone/Products.CMFPlone/issues/1198
> >
> > I think we should use dev.plone.org  as
> entry point for developers, where
> > the most important information/links can be found. e.g. "about the
> PLIP
> > process", "PLIP template", "code style guide", "how to contribute".
> >
> > Regarding the label, the label "04 type: enhancement" comes close
> to be
> > a PLIP label, but we need a specific one.
> >
> > We should keep our Google docs document for managing PLIPs, because
> > github doesn't offer enough features to replace that (voting,
> > conditional labels only valid for PLIPs, etc).
> >
> >
> > Cheers,
> >Johannes
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 11/23/2015 05:04 PM, Ramon Navarro Bosch wrote:
> >> Hey as I can remember we decided to stop dev.plone.org
> 
> >>  as a PLIP platform and decided to use GitHub
> >> Issues with PLIP label. Isn't that right ? Kim was asking for
> >> information about that on the GH and, besides
> buildout.coredev/docs info
> >> is outdated, I couldn't find the label on the Products.CMFPlone issue
> >> tracker.
> >>
> >> What was the decided decision about PLIP process ?
> >>
> >> R
> >>
> >>
> >> ___
> >> Framework-Team mailing list
> >> framework-t...@lists.plone.org
> 
> >> https://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/plone-framework-team
> >>
> 
> 
> 


-- 
Klein & Partner KG, member of BlueDynamics Alliance

___
Framework-Team mailing list
framework-t...@lists.plone.org
https://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/plone-framework-team

Re: [Framework-Team] PLIP Process

2015-11-25 Thread Franco Pellegrini 
On Tue, Nov 24, 2015 at 11:52 AM Ramon Navarro Bosch 
wrote:

> What about using this :
> http://issuetemplate.com/#/plone/Products.CMFPlone/PLIP
>

I like this!


>
> I would disconect dev.plone.org and use the new plone.org (that is going
> to be online soon) to add the info we have at
>
> https://github.com/plone/buildout.coredev/tree/5.0/docs
>
>
I would also disconnect dev.plone.org so it no longer points to the Trac
system, and instead (and I think this is what Johannes meant) would have
dev.plone.org to either be or look like a subsection of plone.org with all
the relevant information for Plone developers


> Ramon
>
>
Cheers,
Franco
___
Framework-Team mailing list
framework-t...@lists.plone.org
https://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/plone-framework-team

Re: [Framework-Team] PLIP Process

2015-11-24 Thread Ramon Navarro Bosch 
What about using this :
http://issuetemplate.com/#/plone/Products.CMFPlone/PLIP

I would disconect dev.plone.org and use the new plone.org (that is going to
be online soon) to add the info we have at

https://github.com/plone/buildout.coredev/tree/5.0/docs

Ramon

El dt., 24 nov. 2015 a les 14:59, Johannes Raggam () va
escriure:

> Sorry, next FWT is December 1st, not today.
>
>
>
> On 11/24/2015 02:54 PM, Johannes Raggam wrote:
> > Let's discuss that at the meeting. Anyways, my position:
> >
> >
> > Yes, there was a decision to give up dev.plone.org and use github issues
> > instead. IIRC, maurits' already made some kind-of plips:
> >
> > https://github.com/plone/Products.CMFPlone/issues/1008
> > https://github.com/plone/Products.CMFPlone/issues/1198
> >
> > I think we should use dev.plone.org as entry point for developers, where
> > the most important information/links can be found. e.g. "about the PLIP
> > process", "PLIP template", "code style guide", "how to contribute".
> >
> > Regarding the label, the label "04 type: enhancement" comes close to be
> > a PLIP label, but we need a specific one.
> >
> > We should keep our Google docs document for managing PLIPs, because
> > github doesn't offer enough features to replace that (voting,
> > conditional labels only valid for PLIPs, etc).
> >
> >
> > Cheers,
> >Johannes
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > On 11/23/2015 05:04 PM, Ramon Navarro Bosch wrote:
> >> Hey as I can remember we decided to stop dev.plone.org
> >>  as a PLIP platform and decided to use GitHub
> >> Issues with PLIP label. Isn't that right ? Kim was asking for
> >> information about that on the GH and, besides buildout.coredev/docs info
> >> is outdated, I couldn't find the label on the Products.CMFPlone issue
> >> tracker.
> >>
> >> What was the decided decision about PLIP process ?
> >>
> >> R
> >>
> >>
> >> ___
> >> Framework-Team mailing list
> >> framework-t...@lists.plone.org
> >> https://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/plone-framework-team
> >>
>
___
Framework-Team mailing list
framework-t...@lists.plone.org
https://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/plone-framework-team

Re: [Framework-Team] PLIP Process

2015-11-24 Thread Johannes Raggam 

Let's discuss that at the meeting. Anyways, my position:


Yes, there was a decision to give up dev.plone.org and use github issues 
instead. IIRC, maurits' already made some kind-of plips:


https://github.com/plone/Products.CMFPlone/issues/1008
https://github.com/plone/Products.CMFPlone/issues/1198

I think we should use dev.plone.org as entry point for developers, where 
the most important information/links can be found. e.g. "about the PLIP 
process", "PLIP template", "code style guide", "how to contribute".


Regarding the label, the label "04 type: enhancement" comes close to be 
a PLIP label, but we need a specific one.


We should keep our Google docs document for managing PLIPs, because 
github doesn't offer enough features to replace that (voting, 
conditional labels only valid for PLIPs, etc).



Cheers,
  Johannes




On 11/23/2015 05:04 PM, Ramon Navarro Bosch wrote:

Hey as I can remember we decided to stop dev.plone.org
 as a PLIP platform and decided to use GitHub
Issues with PLIP label. Isn't that right ? Kim was asking for
information about that on the GH and, besides buildout.coredev/docs info
is outdated, I couldn't find the label on the Products.CMFPlone issue
tracker.

What was the decided decision about PLIP process ?

R


___
Framework-Team mailing list
framework-t...@lists.plone.org
https://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/plone-framework-team


___
Framework-Team mailing list
framework-t...@lists.plone.org
https://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/plone-framework-team

[Framework-Team] PLIP Process

2015-11-23 Thread Ramon Navarro Bosch 
Hey as I can remember we decided to stop dev.plone.org as a PLIP platform
and decided to use GitHub Issues with PLIP label. Isn't that right ? Kim
was asking for information about that on the GH and, besides
buildout.coredev/docs info is outdated, I couldn't find the label on the
Products.CMFPlone issue tracker.

What was the decided decision about PLIP process ?

R
___
Framework-Team mailing list
framework-t...@lists.plone.org
https://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/plone-framework-team