On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 11:35 AM, Rintze Zelle <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On Mon, Jul 4, 2011 at 10:21 AM, Bruce D'Arcus <[email protected]> wrote:
>>
>> I've been prompted to think about CSL development process again, but two 
>> things:
>>
>> 1) Rintze issued a pull request and I accepted it too quickly. But
>> what should be the proper process? What's the appropriate time-frame?
>> How do we deal with dissent? Also, I think in general Rintze has been
>> a little frustrated with the not-entirely fluid process.
>
> I'm not frustrated. I think pull requests can be handy for discussing schema 
> and spec changes. It even allows for collaborative editing (all that is 
> needed is for me to give commit rights to my fork; any additional commits in 
> the feature branches will appear in my pull requests). It's just rather 
> unhandy that it's currently impossible to link pull requests to existing 
> issues. I think things should work fine if: a) I clearly link pull requests 
> to any existing relevant issues, and b) the other main CSL contributors 
> indicate approval or disapproval of the changes in the pull request. It would 
> be great if pull requests can be reviewed within about two weeks, to keep 
> some pace of development.

Quick search says while one can't currently attach a pull request to
an existing issue in the UI, one can do it via the API:

http://goldendict.org/forum/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=1153

> As for dissent: it has proven to be difficult to get timely feedback from all 
> parties involved in CSL. So again, to keep things moving I think I should 
> take the liberty of being slightly aggressive in making commits. I'm always 
> open to feedback, and there's plenty time before releases to reflect on 
> things. I'm planning to maintain a changelog with (proposed) CSL 1.0.1 
> changes so everybody can more easily keep track of things. I'm fine with 
> vetoing power for all, assuming they can support their case.

What would be the precise workflow, then? Would these changes be
maintained on a branch? How would you roll back a specific changes two
months after the fact?

Do we want to formalize some standard time-frame for feedback?

>> 2) some tension in the Sakai world around OAE development process, in
>> which Ian Boston advocated for the Apache model
>>
>> So I looked at the Apache model:
>>
>> <https://blogs.apache.org/comdev/entry/how_apache_projects_use_consensus>
>>
>> ... and want to ask what we should do?
>>
>> I floated one idea (which is basically to use github pull requests +
>> Apache model for spec or schema change proposals) here:
>>
>> <https://github.com/citation-style-language/documentation/pull/18#issuecomment-1493667>
>>
>> So in other words, pull requests require concrete proposals (though we
>> have the problem they may be split across two projects,
>> unfortunately), and the Apache process (essentially, any member has a
>> veto right, and we have an explicit focus on consensus) makes sure
>> we're on the same page.
>
> Yes, I'm wondering if there would be an easier way to discuss CSL changes. In 
> the old days, we mostly relied on the xbiblio list. Now, we have the xbiblio 
> list, the Bitbucket citeproc-test, and 5 Github CSL repos, all with their 
> respective issue trackers. That's not much of a problem for me, but I can 
> imagine it looks rather unorganized for outsiders.

To me, the biggest problem is (in hindsight) is the split between
schema, spec, tests. But I don't know what to do about it now.

What I think we basically need is a process that is a) a little more
transparent and clear, and b) more easily self-sustaining.

Bruce

------------------------------------------------------------------------------
All of the data generated in your IT infrastructure is seriously valuable.
Why? It contains a definitive record of application performance, security 
threats, fraudulent activity, and more. Splunk takes this data and makes 
sense of it. IT sense. And common sense.
http://p.sf.net/sfu/splunk-d2d-c2
_______________________________________________
xbiblio-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/xbiblio-devel

Reply via email to