From 034d59486a9fd045408b98f96362af6510c00a26 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Joe Kutner Date: Sat, 14 Mar 2020 19:04:00 -0500 Subject: [PATCH 1/4] Add Author to RFC Metadata Signed-off-by: Joe Kutner --- text/0000-add-author.md | 55 +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ 1 file changed, 55 insertions(+) create mode 100644 text/0000-add-author.md diff --git a/text/0000-add-author.md b/text/0000-add-author.md new file mode 100644 index 000000000..d4cd5655d --- /dev/null +++ b/text/0000-add-author.md @@ -0,0 +1,55 @@ +# Meta +[meta]: #meta +- Name: Add Author to RFC Metadata +- Start Date: 2020-03-14 +- CNB Pull Request: (leave blank) +- CNB Issue: (leave blank) +- Supersedes: (put "N/A" unless this replaces an existing RFC, then link to that RFC) + +# Summary +[summary]: #summary + +This is a proposal to add an `Author(s):` field to the `Meta` section of the RFC template. + +# Motivation +[motivation]: #motivation + +When an RFC is merged, and then renamed, the commit history is lost. This makes it difficult to remember who wrote the RFC. + +# What it is +[what-it-is]: #what-it-is + +A new `Author(s):` field in the Meta section of the RFC template. + +# How it Works +[how-it-works]: #how-it-works + +You're not going to believe this, but you add an `Author(s):` field to the Meta section of the RFC template. + +# Drawbacks +[drawbacks]: #drawbacks + +Even though the author will be know, the commit history is still hard to find. + +# Alternatives +[alternatives]: #alternatives + +## RFC PR Link + +Instead of an author field, we could enforce that a link to the original RFC PR be added to the RFC after it's merged. This would make it easier to find the author and the history. + +# Prior Art +[prior-art]: #prior-art + +- Rust uses an ["RFC PR" link](https://github.com/rust-lang/rfcs/blob/master/0000-template.md) +- TensorFlow has an ["Author(s)" field](https://github.com/tensorflow/community/blob/master/rfcs/yyyymmdd-rfc-template.md) + +# Unresolved Questions +[unresolved-questions]: #unresolved-questions + +- Does this make it look like only a few person contributed to the RFC (when in reality they are a collaborative process)? + +# Spec. Changes (OPTIONAL) +[spec-changes]: #spec-changes + +None From 931e2c7f3a537ef33c5a448450c0820fc53ae2e8 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Joe Kutner Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2020 23:23:53 -0500 Subject: [PATCH 2/4] Updates based on WG discussion Signed-off-by: Joe Kutner --- text/0000-add-author.md | 8 +++++--- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 3 deletions(-) diff --git a/text/0000-add-author.md b/text/0000-add-author.md index d4cd5655d..96e3cf261 100644 --- a/text/0000-add-author.md +++ b/text/0000-add-author.md @@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ [meta]: #meta - Name: Add Author to RFC Metadata - Start Date: 2020-03-14 -- CNB Pull Request: (leave blank) +- CNB Pull Request: https://github.com/buildpacks/rfcs/pull/64 - CNB Issue: (leave blank) - Supersedes: (put "N/A" unless this replaces an existing RFC, then link to that RFC) @@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ This is a proposal to add an `Author(s):` field to the `Meta` section of the RFC # Motivation [motivation]: #motivation -When an RFC is merged, and then renamed, the commit history is lost. This makes it difficult to remember who wrote the RFC. +When an RFC is merged, and then renamed, the commit history is lost. This makes it difficult to remember who wrote the RFC. Sometimes, an RFC is written by more than one person, but the linked PR will not always show this. # What it is [what-it-is]: #what-it-is @@ -26,6 +26,8 @@ A new `Author(s):` field in the Meta section of the RFC template. You're not going to believe this, but you add an `Author(s):` field to the Meta section of the RFC template. +We will also rename the `CNB Pull Request` to `RFC Pull Request`. + # Drawbacks [drawbacks]: #drawbacks @@ -36,7 +38,7 @@ Even though the author will be know, the commit history is still hard to find. ## RFC PR Link -Instead of an author field, we could enforce that a link to the original RFC PR be added to the RFC after it's merged. This would make it easier to find the author and the history. +Instead of an author field, we could only enforce that a link to the original RFC PR be added to the RFC after it's merged. This would make it easier to find the author and the history, but we would need to ensure that all authors are represented in the PR. # Prior Art [prior-art]: #prior-art From edeffc26fb28bf0e95e38f339cd94f49523660ab Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Joe Kutner Date: Thu, 26 Mar 2020 23:25:04 -0500 Subject: [PATCH 3/4] Updates based on WG discussion Signed-off-by: Joe Kutner --- text/0000-add-author.md | 2 ++ 1 file changed, 2 insertions(+) diff --git a/text/0000-add-author.md b/text/0000-add-author.md index 96e3cf261..bb294d51d 100644 --- a/text/0000-add-author.md +++ b/text/0000-add-author.md @@ -28,6 +28,8 @@ You're not going to believe this, but you add an `Author(s):` field to the Meta We will also rename the `CNB Pull Request` to `RFC Pull Request`. +Because `CNB Issue` is rarely used, we will also renamed it to `Related Issues`. + # Drawbacks [drawbacks]: #drawbacks From b8d26a953f2b46eee4e4b924a49688ce3350ab10 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Joe Kutner Date: Thu, 2 Apr 2020 14:26:55 -0500 Subject: [PATCH 4/4] Update RFC PR links in template Signed-off-by: Joe Kutner --- text/0000-add-author.md | 9 +++++---- 1 file changed, 5 insertions(+), 4 deletions(-) diff --git a/text/0000-add-author.md b/text/0000-add-author.md index bb294d51d..6fe705670 100644 --- a/text/0000-add-author.md +++ b/text/0000-add-author.md @@ -24,11 +24,12 @@ A new `Author(s):` field in the Meta section of the RFC template. # How it Works [how-it-works]: #how-it-works -You're not going to believe this, but you add an `Author(s):` field to the Meta section of the RFC template. +We will add the following to the RFC `Meta` section: -We will also rename the `CNB Pull Request` to `RFC Pull Request`. - -Because `CNB Issue` is rarely used, we will also renamed it to `Related Issues`. +``` +- Author(s): (Github usernames) +- RFC Pull Request: (leave blank) +``` # Drawbacks [drawbacks]: #drawbacks