This repository has been archived by the owner on Feb 8, 2023. It is now read-only.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
OKRs - 2019 Q1 Go Core Dev #794
OKRs - 2019 Q1 Go Core Dev #794
Changes from 3 commits
95f7617
0409db9
97e9aa1
90c2102
81f7724
e39e7be
bbff547
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@momack2 convinced me that ignoring documentation is a bad idea (ok, fine...) and suggested
Yes, this is going to be hard, but I think that's the only way we're going to make this happen.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
🙌 this allows us to improve and update our documentation incrementally as we touch/grok the code in service of our Q1 efforts. To measure this, we can pull all changed files in Q1 and check documentation coverage (and maybe spot-check documentation quality to ensure it's above par). Our goal with updating the docs is to make it easier for other contributors (new or old) to quickly onboard on modules and help move them forward.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think CoreAPI and Base32 actually fall under this objective.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@travisperson is this still a goal of yours? I don't know if you're still working on gx udpates or not.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think a goal should be to either onboard a contributor/full-time maintainer excited about pushing gx forward (@warpfork - any ideas from recent conferences?) and really double down on making this a powerful proof of concept that is friendly and useful for go developers, or adopt @Stebalien's proposal to optimize for developer velocity in the short/mid term.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yah - absolutely agree; one of those is going to be an OKR. And possibly even both.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
"Optimizing developer velocity" could be the objective. The KR would be "go-ipfs developers are no longer adversly affected by gx" (with some significant rewording). That way, either getting a maintainer or moving away from gx are valid solutions.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I've added the following to the spreadsheet: