Hi Britton,

On Mon, Apr 29, 2013 at 10:06 AM, Britton Smith <brittonsmith@gmail.com> wrote:
> Hi all,
>
> One of the things that came out of the yt strategy meeting last week was a
> discussion of reorganizing how the YTEPs are listed.  Currently, it looks
> like this:
> http://ytep.readthedocs.org/en/latest/
>
> There are essentially two problems with this.  First, once a YTEP is
> accepted, it is difficult to tell the status of the actual enhancement that
> was proposed.  Is it being implemented?  Is it done?  Second, because we are
> doing revisions in PRs, there is no listing of unaccepted YTEPs.
>
> For comparison, here is the enhancement proposal index for python:
> http://www.python.org/dev/peps/
>
> They have categories for types (standards, information, and process) and
> status (accepted, rejected, withdrawn, draft, etc.).  This may be slightly
> overkill for us since we are only on YTEP 14 and they have hundreds.  I
> still think some organization would be helpful.  I will have a go at that
> and issue a PR.
>
> The question I have for people is with regard to process.  In order to have
> statuses for the unaccepted proposals, they have to exist in some fashion in
> the main repo.  How do we want to do that?  Or do we want to do that?  One
> way would be to issue a PR that would include adding it to the index as
> Draft status and have it be accepted quickly.  People can still leave
> comments on a merged PR and the author can then issue a new one which moves
> the listing to the accepted status.

I like this, but I suspect that the number of comments will probably
go down.  I think Python discusses via python-dev, but I think the PR
process is superior for our use case since it's threaded.

Maybe if we stick to the idea -- like they have -- of having a
"rejected" status it will be easier to manaeg this?

Anyway, I'm +1 on trying this out.  Thank you for addressing this, as
well.  As we move forward we'll need to cultivate items from the YTEPs
and move them into the docs, as well as regard them as a form of
process documentation, and this will make both of those things easier.

-Matt

>
> I'd really like to hear people's thoughts about this.  Even if we don't
> adopt the above strategy, I'd still like to organize the accepted YTEPs as
> implemented and not implemented so people can get a better idea of where
> they might get involved.
>
> Britton
>

> _______________________________________________
> yt-dev mailing list
> yt-dev@lists.spacepope.org
> http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org
>
_______________________________________________
yt-dev mailing list
yt-dev@lists.spacepope.org
http://lists.spacepope.org/listinfo.cgi/yt-dev-spacepope.org