Initiative refactor #446
Initiative refactor #446
Conversation
|
Thanks! Happy to be included here. :) </consented> |
MylesBorins
force-pushed
the
initiatve-refactor
branch
from
b5c0371
to
676248c
Compare
Strategic-Initiatives.md
Outdated
|
|
||
| ### Champion | ||
|
|
||
| [James Snell][jasnell] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I should be included as stakeholder here, and probably the rest of the the @nodejs/http2 team.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I've added you as a stakeholder. I'd like to get explicit consent before adding individuals to the list.
Do you think we should add teams in here too as it's own section?
MylesBorins
force-pushed
the
initiatve-refactor
branch
from
676248c
to
1b2ec92
Compare
|
Yes, I’d be glad to be involved! |
|
What are the criteria to be a stakeholder? |
|
@ljharb currently they have been identified by champions or self nominated and approved by champion A definition of these roles and how they are decided would be good. |
| ## Error Messages | ||
|
|
||
| ### Champion | ||
| [James Snell][jasnell] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would like to be a stakeholder of the error message initiatives, thanks
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would like to be a stakeholder for the error messages as well. @joyeecheung @jasnell Is that fine for you? :-)
|
Should we set up teams for initiatives that don't have a related team yet? It would be easier to ping people for reviews and discussions. |
|
@MylesBorins are you going to be able to get back to this so we can land? |
This build on top of nodejs#445 and restructures how we layout strategic initiatives. By breaking it out of a table we will be able to include much more details. One of the added details here is the inclusion of stakeholders, individuals outside of the champion who are actively involved in an initiative. I have only added these for `Modules` at this time but we should like expand this before landing. The hope is that this will improve communication and discoverability as well as offer a new opportunity to recognize significant work. Refs: nodejs#442
MylesBorins
force-pushed
the
initiatve-refactor
branch
from
1b2ec92
to
38243b9
Compare
|
rebased. @mhdawson I'm imagining stakeholders could be internal or external, so I'm not sure leads works. Could you perhaps push an example commit about alternative layout? |
| [Bradley Farias][bmeck] | ||
| [Guy Bedford][guybedford] | ||
| [Jan Olaf Krems][jkrems] | ||
| [Michaël Zasso][targos] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
nit: two spaces at the end of each line
| ## Error Messages | ||
|
|
||
| ### Champion | ||
| [James Snell][jasnell] |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I would like to be a stakeholder for the error messages as well. @joyeecheung @jasnell Is that fine for you? :-)
|
|
||
| ### Important Links | ||
|
|
||
| * [Tracking issue on main repo](https://github.com/nodejs/node/issues/11273) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
That is actually outdated. Currently there is no real tracking issue. We still have a lot of errors in C++ that have to be ported, so we might want to open a tracking issue for that.
Besides that I also want to suggest some bigger changes to the errors soon.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@BridgeAR There is a tracking issue for C++ -> JS errors: nodejs/node#18106
|
Please feel free to push nits and updates
…On Sun, Feb 18, 2018, 9:41 AM Joyee Cheung ***@***.***> wrote:
***@***.**** commented on this pull request.
------------------------------
In Strategic-Initiatives.md
<#446 (comment)>:
> +### Champion
+
+[Anna Henningson][addaleax]
+
+### Important Links
+
+* [Worker Repo](https://github.com/nodejs/worker)
+
+## Error Messages
+
+### Champion
+[James Snell][jasnell]
+
+### Important Links
+
+* [Tracking issue on main repo](nodejs/node#11273)
@BridgeAR <https://github.com/bridgear> There is a tracking issue for C++
-> JS errors: nodejs/node#18106
<nodejs/node#18106>
—
You are receiving this because you were mentioned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#446 (comment)>, or mute
the thread
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAecV_PVcCxmyQXMhDIVpeRKokX_19Veks5tWDaSgaJpZM4RECuy>
.
|
|
|
||
| [Myles Borins][MylesBorins] | ||
|
|
||
| ### Stakeholders |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I feel like we should just point to the whole modules team lol
|
|
||
| ### Important Links | ||
|
|
||
| * [initial pull request](https://github.com/nodejs/node/pull/16414) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Please have the primary link be to https://github.com/Fishrock123/bob for the current time.
This PR is linked to from some issues there, but is vastly out of date compared to anything in the repo.
| * [Tracking issue on TSC repo](https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/issues/383) | ||
|
|
||
|
|
||
| ## New Streams APIs |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This is... probably not all that indicative of what we are doing.
Future "Streams" implementation & API may be more accurate.
|
ping @MylesBorins, do we still want to land this? |
|
We can close for now an revisit later |
This build on top of #445 and restructures how we layout strategic
initiatives. By breaking it out of a table we will be able to include
much more details.
One of the added details here is the inclusion of stakeholders,
individuals outside of the champion who are actively involved in
an initiative. I have only added these for
Modulesat this timebut we should like expand this before landing.
The hope is that this will improve communication and discoverability
as well as offer a new opportunity to recognize significant work.
Refs: #442
/cc @bmeck @guybedford @jkrems and @targos to get consent to include them as stakeholders for modules