Coordinate github labels for discussions and notes

[himorin]

While chatting with Kida-san (@kidayasuo ), having English notes (esp. translated from ones in mail from Binn-sensi) as github issues with doc:note (or something) label attached was pointed to be a good idea and starting point.
For now, some are used as input to JLreq or Simple-ruby, but mostly only used for references in discussions by Japanese. Also, some of these notes could be quite useful to be referred from external issues for typographic questions.

So, how about:

• add new doc:note label for all of these issues
• add notes translated into English with reference to mail list archive, as issues

also for these work, attaching todo label (need to add) for untranslated ones could be useful.

[himorin]

updated title, per suggestion in #250 (comment)

Proposal:

• jlreq for JLreq issues (to be applied to existing issues which relate to JLreq NOTE)
• note (instead of doc:note) for all those issues

[himorin]

Additional point: TF members could have FAQ-ish topics which does not be included into JLReq, such as item A was not used in common Japanese typography and no standard way(s) exist. And these might be useful to be gathered into somewhere (reverse gap-analysis!?).

[kidayasuo]

I would like to keep labels as simple as possible to reduce the maintenance work.

• re:jlreq: Currently jlreq document related issus are tracked by three labels, errata, editorial and future (and amendment?), depending on the scope of the change. The proposed jlreq label is meant to be attached whenever one of these labels are used in order to build a hierarchical label structure. I would instead propose to attach jlreq-doc: (or jlreq-documents:) prefix to the names of existing labels. This way it is clearer that these labels are meant for future revisions of the jlreq document. This way you do not need to make sure to attach two labels e.g. errata and jlreq, whenever you create a new issue, and you do not need to do a regular maintenance of making sure if jlreq is attached as expected.
• re:note: In the mailing list there are cases that Bin-sensei or other members post a good summary of a subject, and they are worthy of translating and archiving on GitHub. These are not “issues” but references that people can look at or refer to when related issues arise. Also they can be good candidate materials for future update of jlreq document. I would suggest to label them as reference-materials. This way it is crystal clear the purpose of these gh issues. notes I think is too generic. I do not think we can translate all notes that are potentially worthy of translating but we would try to handle at least important ones.

[himorin]

it seems most of all related colleagues accept the proposal by @kidayasuo , let me take following actions around mid- this week (like May/12). Please leave comment/suggestion or emoji if you feel actions are fine or not.

• rename amendment, editorial, enhancement, errata, future, wording labels with jlreq-doc: prefix, and have text something like [JLReq-doc] as prefix in their description (to tell easily on a list of labels)
• labels keep as is: bug, duplicate, help wanted, invalid, wontfix
  • Q: could be fine to remove bug (or keep as jlreq-doc:bug for formatting script issues?) and help wanted?
• check all issues in gap-analysis, file new issue or relabel where appropriate, and remove this label (as in another issue [house-keeping] keep consistency of label usage over issues #250 )
• add reference-materials label, and start working on update descriptions in this repository #249
• check all issues without label, and attach appropriate label(s)

[r12a]

@himorin if you create new gap analysis issues, please be sure to use the new template (normally accessed via the New Issue selector, but you may need to copy the format that produces and rework the old text along those lines).

[himorin]

Qs:

• is it better to use the same label colors for jlreq-doc: labels?
• how about bug and help wanted? (as above)
• do we need a specific label for coordination of TF (or this repository), like this issue?

[xfq]

• do we need a specific label for coordination of TF (or this repository), like this issue?

I think there should not be many such issues, so it won’t be a big problem if we don’t add it. But if we decide to add it, we can choose a name like meta.