[zeromq-dev] New version of C4 (C4.2?)

Osiris Pedroso opedroso at gmail.com
Thu May 5 14:40:11 CEST 2016


If you are reviewing RFC 42 and it is policy to not accept contributions in
certain file format, I believe it is time to put those in the RFC, so it is
clear to contributors what is not allowed.

Pieter, you yourself was quoted in an article as having impressed a person
when he suggested you should not accept PR unless a certain quality
threshold was achieved.
You answer, that so impressed that person, was that "Who am I to decide
what are the quality standards for this project?"

But if you have such a rule though, you are the person who defines which
file formats can and can not be added to the projects.

Which one of you, zeromq developers, on your daily workings do not open a
DOC, a PDF, or an XML file?
You do know all these file formats also have XML representations, right?
Are XML files allowed to be added to the projects?
They seem to be since, we have several already part of GSL, CZMQ, ZPROJECT,
ZYRE and MALAMUTE just to name a few.

If so, are we going to depend on the contents of XML files that can be
checked in?
So can I check in a Word document that was SavedAs XML format or not?

I propose you revise the RFC 42 and make it clear what kind of
contributions are allowed.

Otherwise you will get annoyed contributors that read the RFC, work for
hours on a submission and get slapped on the hand for doing what s/he
thought was a benefit for the community.


On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 1:57 AM Pieter Hintjens <ph at imatix.com> wrote:

> OK, I'm going to answer my own (stupid) question.
>
> - RFC 22 will be deprecated
> - RFC 42 is the new version of C4 (revision 3)
> - I'll stop using the cute form "C4.1"
>
> So we can instead look at RFC42 and check that it's accurate.
>
> -Pieter
>
> On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 8:52 AM, Pieter Hintjens <ph at imatix.com> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I was writing a summary article on community building and revisited
> > the C4 RFC. There were many small things that were out of date,
> > speculative, or did not fit with our current best practice.
> >
> > So I've updated it here: https://github.com/zeromq/rfc/pull/83
> >
> > Please *do* read the diffs and let me know your opinions.
> >
> > I also would like advice on whether:
> >
> > * we make a new RFC (C4.2)
> > * we accept to change the existing stable RFC unilaterally
> >
> > Option 1 is more correct but means we have to update a lot of
> > projects. Option 2 is lazy and breaks our process.
> >
> > -Pieter
> >
> > -Pieter
> _______________________________________________
> zeromq-dev mailing list
> zeromq-dev at lists.zeromq.org
> http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.zeromq.org/pipermail/zeromq-dev/attachments/20160505/1db09fa3/attachment.htm>


More information about the zeromq-dev mailing list