Integrated some feedback I got from Jon (good points both). Anyone else? On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 2:53 PM Joshua McKenzie <jmcken...@apache.org> wrote:
> Thanks for that insight Pavel. Will be a helpful and useful reference as > we start to test out our CEP process after 4.0 solidifies. One thing that > really stood out to me worth calling out: >> >> >> >> - Engage the wider Swift community in the ongoing evolution of Swift, >> and >> >> >> - Maintain the vision and conceptual coherence of Swift. >> >> There is a natural tension between these two goals. Open evolution >> processes are, by nature, chaotic. Yet, maintaining a coherent vision for >> something as complicated as a programming language requires some level of >> coordination. The Swift evolution process aims to strike a balance that >> best serves the Swift community as a whole. > > > I'd love us to follow up on that topic (future vision, coherence, etc) on > the project after we iron out our voting and governance process. > > So that being said - there's no further feedback on the doc in its current > form. Anybody else have any thoughts on where things stand? > > > On Wed, Jun 10, 2020 at 1:55 PM Pavel Yaskevich <pove...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> On Mon, Jun 8, 2020 at 3:12 AM Mick Semb Wever <m...@apache.org> wrote: >> >> > > > With regards to CEPs, I personally don't see any value in voting to >> > start >> > > one. >> > > >> > > Agree with this, and I'd go even further - requiring a vote in order >> to >> > > propose an idea runs so counter to the idea of a CEP that it would >> > default >> > > the purpose of even having them. The CEP is the _proposal_ for a >> change >> > > that gets fleshed out enough so people can understand the idea and >> _then_ >> > > vote on it, not the other way around. >> > >> > >> > Totally agree that CEPs should be as light-weight as possible, and with >> the >> > sentiments above. But would also like to keep the discussion open to >> > encourage and include as many voices as possible. >> > >> > My _questioning_ is around the value in "initial exposure and >> discussion". >> > It is implied already that there is lazy consensus in starting a CEP, >> and >> > that starting a CEP is more than just an initial proposal of an idea. >> One >> > example is we require a CEP to have a Shepherd that is a PMC member. >> > Encouraging a vote, or better-yet keeping it light-weight: an initial >> > DISCUSS thread as early as possible in the CEP lifecycle does come with >> > value. From openly calling out for a Shepherd, to allowing the more >> > experienced community members to add their insight (without having to >> get >> > formally involved in it), there's potential value in encouraging such >> > open-mode opening discussion early on (versus the cost of additional >> > process). >> > >> > Really interested in hearing from folk from other communities and >> projects >> > that do CEP/CIP and how their lifecycle through the process works and >> what >> > they have learnt. >> > >> >> Here is a description of the process Swift Programming Language uses - >> https://github.com/apple/swift-evolution/blob/master/process.md. >> >
