Discussion:
[CSSWG] New issue labels in GitHub
(too old to reply)
Alan Stearns
2018-02-15 00:30:45 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Hey all,

I went to create some new labels, and found that GitHub itself is promoting “Good First Issue” and “Help Wanted”. So that’s what I added to our repo:

Good First Issue: An uncomplicated change a new person should be able to make.

Help Wanted: Edits needed for a document without a current editor, pull requests welcome.

Thanks,

Alan
Process
-------
- astearns will make new github label to distinguish edits where the
community is invited to make the edits as well as edits that are
good for
Florian Rivoal
2018-02-15 07:42:20 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
Post by Alan Stearns
Hey all,
Good First Issue: An uncomplicated change a new person should be able to make.
Help Wanted: Edits needed for a document without a current editor, pull requests welcome.
Hi,

These look good to me.

However, we also need a bit of (visible) documentation telling people how this works,
and in particular how that relates to resolution.

Something like this (with a bit of extra context to make sense to newcomers):

* If there's been a resolution, the Pull Request needs to be based on what it says.
If the spec has an editor, they should follow up and review/merge it.
If the spec does not have an editor, then [... insert what we expect people to do ...]

* If there hasn't been a resolution, the Pull Request may be merged as is
if what it does it trivial and/or the spec is early stage,
but quite possibly it will need to be discussed by the WG before being approved.
Using the Agenda+ label is a good way to bringing a proposed changed to the attention
of the WG.

—Florian
Amelia Bellamy-Royds
2018-02-15 17:28:40 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
The logical place for those points would be the Contributing file

https://github.com/w3c/csswg-drafts/blob/master/CONTRIBUTING.md

GitHub makes links to this file visible at various stages in the process.
See also:

https://help.github.com/articles/setting-guidelines-for-repository-contributors/
Post by Alan Stearns
Hey all,
I went to create some new labels, and found that GitHub itself is
promoting “Good First Issue” and “Help Wanted”. So that’s what I added to
Post by Alan Stearns
Good First Issue: An uncomplicated change a new person should be able to
make.
Post by Alan Stearns
Help Wanted: Edits needed for a document without a current editor, pull
requests welcome.
Hi,
These look good to me.
However, we also need a bit of (visible) documentation telling people how this works,
and in particular how that relates to resolution.
* If there's been a resolution, the Pull Request needs to be based on what it says.
If the spec has an editor, they should follow up and review/merge it.
If the spec does not have an editor, then [... insert what we expect people to do ...]
* If there hasn't been a resolution, the Pull Request may be merged as is
if what it does it trivial and/or the spec is early stage,
but quite possibly it will need to be discussed by the WG before being approved.
Using the Agenda+ label is a good way to bringing a proposed changed to the attention
of the WG.
—Florian
Brad Czerniak
2018-02-15 21:40:31 UTC
Permalink
Raw Message
There is also ISSUE_TEMPLATE and PULL_REQUEST_TEMPLATE available:
https://help.github.com/articles/creating-a-pull-request-template-for-
your-repository/

On Feb 15, 2018 12:32 PM, "Amelia Bellamy-Royds" <
***@gmail.com> wrote:

The logical place for those points would be the Contributing file


GitHub makes links to this file visible at various stages in the process.
See also:

https://help.github.com/articles/setting-guidelines-for-
repository-contributors/
Post by Alan Stearns
Hey all,
I went to create some new labels, and found that GitHub itself is
promoting “Good First Issue” and “Help Wanted”. So that’s what I added to
Post by Alan Stearns
Good First Issue: An uncomplicated change a new person should be able to
make.
Post by Alan Stearns
Help Wanted: Edits needed for a document without a current editor, pull
requests welcome.
Hi,
These look good to me.
However, we also need a bit of (visible) documentation telling people how this works,
and in particular how that relates to resolution.
* If there's been a resolution, the Pull Request needs to be based on what it says.
If the spec has an editor, they should follow up and review/merge it.
If the spec does not have an editor, then [... insert what we expect people to do ...]
* If there hasn't been a resolution, the Pull Request may be merged as is
if what it does it trivial and/or the spec is early stage,
but quite possibly it will need to be discussed by the WG before being approved.
Using the Agenda+ label is a good way to bringing a proposed changed to the attention
of the WG.
—Florian
Loading...