Developers of Sympa

[Soji Ikeda <address@concealed>]

Marc,

I can’t agree to all of your post below. Especially, I definitely disagree to 
your argument that “core developers” should not use function of GitHub.

You should tell us the basis of your argument to persuade us.

Regards,
— Soji

iPhoneから送信

2018/01/07 0:13、Marc Chantreux <address@concealed>のメール:

> hello people,
> 
> two days ago, I did a very short comment to an issue we debated on IRC
> yesterday. For those who don't backlog (i'm one of those as i really
> think that every important information should be published on this
> list), let me sumarize every topic discussed.
> 
> Note that:
> 
> * this is not a set of rules but topics that are really open to debate
> * those topics came from Soji, Racke and I. they are published with no
>  particular order
> 
> that said, this is the code of conduct for github issues:
> 
> * we should remember github issues are not a continuity of the IRC channel:
>  as we add a comment or issue, we should be sure that every factual
>  content is completed by a greeting and enough of polite words to be
>  friendly to every reader, no mater how close you are to the person you
>  answer to.
> 
> * as we should care about the clarity of an issue, don't open another
>  topic in its comment. every information put in a issue thread should
>  be closely related to the description of the issue itself.
> 
> * github issues should be used only for user requests and bug report.
>  every evolution of behavior (new option, modification of existing one,
>  deprecation, ...) or architecture (new module, api modification,
>  database changes,  ...) should be discussed on the developper mailing list.
>  Questions/Proposals:
>  * we could use an RfC prefix of the mail subject then implement an
>    rfcXXX-developper branch ?
>  * we need to get a rule when an rfc don't get a consensus. For
>    example: we broke the CGI support in a minor version which was a
>    terrible idea for me. I guess there are things we can't get
>    consensus on so i'm worring about how to accept an RFC.
> 
> Another thing proposed by Soji to work together is a CPC (for CPC
> "clinicopathological conference"). without explainations, it
> it looks like a mounthly meetings we previously discuted (a timeboxed
> meeting scheduled every mounths with a regular date and
> a collectivly maintained agenda). Soji? can you tell us more? Even setup
> a first event the way you want it?
> 
> thanks for reading and don't hesitate to comment and share thoughts
> about everything.
> 
> sympatiquement,
> marc