Join GitHub today
GitHub is home to over 31 million developers working together to host and review code, manage projects, and build software together.Sign up
[RFC] New dependencies to Emission/Reaction go through the RFC process #117
Fail PRs which add new keys to the
The fail would then be removed when an RFC is referenced in the body of the PR. Perhaps it canlook for a string like
We'd like to find a better space to discuss additions to our two larger component libraries, it can be a shame to write a PR only to have it blocked on the discussion around adding a dependency
This is mainly to:
Some recent examples:
What an example RFC could look like
Some PRs are pretty trivial, and so it should be possible to skip the discussion.
You can see our discussion in notion (it's a bit light on notes because I was the one taking notes and talking at the same time )
An extension to this, we could opt to have a new template for these RFCs, which could look like:
(The check list could come from @alloy's work on dependency rubrics)
We should do what we can to encourage that the necessary discussion happens upfront - failing a PR is probably too late as usually by that time your implementation is pretty coupled to the dependency that you introduced.
This will introduce a some overhead in some product work ("why is this small ticket taking so long?") but perfectly fits the description of a "spike" ticket.
We've shipped a doc that gives heuristics on whether a dev should have an RFC In https://github.com/artsy/README/blob/master/playbooks/dependencies.md
Will add a Peril rule that detects the changes and notes that it may need an RFC