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

Kevin Sapper kevinsapper88 at gmail.com
Thu May 5 16:04:14 CEST 2016


If you think a project should have a CONTRIBUTING.md which integrates 
nicely with github feel free to adopt one from an existing projects. If 
you think it doesn't contain all necessary information create a pull 
request with your changes. Same goes for the C4. Just as always state 
the problem and explain your solution.

On Do, Mai 5, 2016 at 3:36 , Osiris Pedroso <opedroso at gmail.com> wrote:
> How can we codify these community rules then and check them in a 
> conspicuous location that will be seen by new contributors then?
> 
> Seems like CZMQ, ZYRE, ZPROJECT, NETMQ all have a CONTRIBUTING.md.
> 
> Malamute/README.md only points to http://rfc.zeromq.org/spec:22 as 
> contributing guidelines.
> I think it should have a CONTRIBUTING.md as well.
> 
> I would appreciate if you took the time to make them clear by 
> updating CONTRIBUTING.txt and regenerating CONTRIBUTING.md for these 
> projects, if that is the correct place.
> 
> 
> On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 7:54 AM Pieter Hintjens <ph at imatix.com> wrote:
>> Hi Osiris,
>> 
>> This lies outside the scope of the process... there are presumably
>> projects that depend on checking in PDFs and other weird formats. In
>> general a portable software project (and this is common for the vast
>> majority of projects I've seen) demand text only formats that are
>> compatible with source control (i.e. allow text diffs). Otherwise git
>> really makes no sense.
>> 
>> I appreciate you were burnt by checking in Office documents, this
>> stuff happens. Formats like markdown and our simple-simple XML models
>> took a long time to develop as usable and yet compatible with source
>> control.
>> 
>> -Pieter
>> 
>> 
>> On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 2:40 PM, Osiris Pedroso <opedroso at gmail.com> 
>> wrote:
>> > 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
>> >
>> >
>> > _______________________________________________
>> > zeromq-dev mailing list
>> > zeromq-dev at lists.zeromq.org
>> > http://lists.zeromq.org/mailman/listinfo/zeromq-dev
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/c27c24e0/attachment.htm>


More information about the zeromq-dev mailing list