[ghc-steering-committee] Redid our documentation

[Manuel M T Chakravarty]

Hi Joachim,

No, I don’t think, the secretary should be expected to watch repositories. However, GitHub notifications can be configured to send an email — here is the notifications settings screen



If ”Email” is checked under ”Participating” for the secretary, an @mention will send an email to the secretary.

Hence, I would suggest to require of proposal authors that they add a comment explicitly @mention’ing the secretary when they want to submit a proposal for review.

And, thank you that you are willing to assume the role of the secretary!

Cheers,
Manuel

PS: I haven’t used GitHub project boards myself much, but they may be useful to provide a high-level overview on GitHub itself: https://help.github.com/articles/tracking-the-progress-of-your-work-with-projects/ <https://help.github.com/articles/tracking-the-progress-of-your-work-with-projects/>

PPS: Alternatively, if you don’t want to get emails for GitHub conversations you are participating in, you can also always just watch your GitHub notifications on the web interface without any need to actually go into all the repos and check whether somebody wrote a message requesting review.

> Joachim Breitner <mail at joachim-breitner.de>:
> 
> Hi Manuel,
> 
> just to make sure I get what you are saying, are you suggesting this
> approach?
> 
> * (At least) one committee member, let’s call him the secretary,
>   promises to watch the GitHub repository close enough.
> * When an author wants to bring a proposal before the committe, he
>   adds a comment to the a pull request, briefly summarizing the major 
>   points raised during the discussion period and stating their belief
>   that the proposal is ready for review..
> * The secretary notices that, labels the proposal as
>   “Pending committee review” and notifies the committee.
> 
> This would be slightly more convenient for the submitters, and slightly
> more work for the committee. But I guess it makes sense, and we can try
> this way.
> 
> Simon already shoved me towards picking up the “secretary” hat, to
> reduce load on Ben. Ben, unless you protest, I’ll take over this role.
> 
> I updated
> https://github.com/ghc-proposals/ghc-proposals/tree/wip/docs-restructuring
> accordingly
> 
> Greetings,
> Joachim
> 
> 
> Am Montag, den 27.02.2017, 10:16 +1100 schrieb Manuel M T Chakravarty:
>> Joachim’s suggestion makes sense to me, but I also agree with Chris
>> that if we can use GitHub notifications, that would be more flexible.
>> (Everybody who wants can turn the notifications into emails for just
>> themselves in their own GitHub settings.)
>> 
>>> Christopher Allen <cma at bitemyapp.com>:
>>> 
>>> Label changes are pretty under the radar, which is why my original
>>> suggestion included the project board.
>>> 
>>> Messages to the mailing list could work, but I'd prefer we kept
>>> this
>>> for our discussions and figure out notifications on Github.
>>> 
>>> IIRC, we were supposed to assign helpers to the issues. My prior
>>> assumption had been that the proposer would cc them in the Github
>>> issue. The helper would then notify the broader committee on the
>>> mailing list.
>>> 
>>> On Sun, Feb 26, 2017 at 10:47 AM, Richard Eisenberg <rae at cs.brynmaw
>>> r.edu> wrote:
>>>> 
>>>>> On Feb 25, 2017, at 11:26 PM, Joachim Breitner <mail at joachim-br
>>>>> eitner.de> wrote:
>>>>> 
>>>>> * What was “Under Discussion” is now simply any PR that does
>>>>> not have
>>>>> any other label. This way, when opening discussion, nothing
>>>>> concrete
>>>>> has to be done. Which is easier. (GitHub allows to list all PRs
>>>>> that
>>>>> have no label, so there is no loss in functionality here.)
>>>>> 
>>>>> * When the author wants to submit the PR, he sends a mail to
>>>>> this
>>>>> mailinglist (is this set up to accept mails from non-
>>>>> subscribers?) and
>>>>> it its the task of the shephard to set the label to indicate
>>>>> that that
>>>>> the committee has accepted to review the proposal. (At this
>>>>> point, the
>>>>> shephard could for example set the `Out-of-scope` label
>>>>> instead.)
>>>> 
>>>> While I have not re-read the documentation changes, this tweak
>>>> seems sensible to me. I was always skeptical of having us react
>>>> simply to a label change without an email.
>>>> 
>>>> Thanks for doing this!
>>>> 
>>>> Richard
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> ghc-steering-committee mailing list
>>>> ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org
>>>> https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-co
>>>> mmittee
>>> 
>>> 
>>> 
>>> -- 
>>> Chris Allen
>>> Currently working on http://haskellbook.com
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> ghc-steering-committee mailing list
>>> ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org
>>> https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-comm
>>> ittee
>> 
>> _______________________________________________
>> ghc-steering-committee mailing list
>> ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org
>> https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-commit
>> tee
> -- 
> Joachim Breitner
>  mail at joachim-breitner.de
>  http://www.joachim-breitner.de/
> _______________________________________________
> ghc-steering-committee mailing list
> ghc-steering-committee at haskell.org
> https://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ghc-steering-committee

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-steering-committee/attachments/20170227/e9568682/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: PastedGraphic-1.png
Type: image/png
Size: 193927 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-steering-committee/attachments/20170227/e9568682/attachment-0001.png>