Skip to content

Created an initial list of work items#31

Open
DevQps wants to merge 1 commit into
rust-secure-code:masterfrom
DevQps:add-work-items
Open

Created an initial list of work items#31
DevQps wants to merge 1 commit into
rust-secure-code:masterfrom
DevQps:add-work-items

Conversation

@DevQps

@DevQps DevQps commented Mar 17, 2019

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor

Description

This is the list I managed to digest from the issues in our repository.
But to be really honest, I feel like it is a bit messy somehow...
Like it's a list of random things belonging to a certain area or something.

Maybe expressing the our goals as questions and sub-questions would make things more clear?

@DevQps

DevQps commented Mar 17, 2019

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

Forgive me for the random mix of capitals. I will fix that once we reach consensus.

@tarcieri

tarcieri commented Mar 17, 2019

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

The 2019 goals label tracks the present year's goals. Perhaps that should be linked from the README, but otherwise I think it accomplishes what you're describing here, and is a bit more dynamic than itemizing them in the README.

@DevQps

DevQps commented Mar 18, 2019

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@tarcieri I think you are right. Right now it feels a bit off somehow. I can change it to a link to the issue tracker.

I do however think it would be a good idea to list the questions that we aim to solve in our workgroup. Our mission statement contains a few hints but it doesn't provide the concrete problems that we current face in Rust. The 2019 goals aim to solve those more concrete problems, but for newcomers I can imagine that it is not immediatly clear which goals we're trying to solve with our work items.

What do you think about this?

@DevQps

DevQps commented Apr 21, 2019

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Contributor Author

@Shnatsel @tarcieri What do you think about this?

@Shnatsel

Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

I think this is a good way to improve visibility of the work items. Well, the WG repo itself doesn't have much visibility right now either, but that's a different problem. I'm inclined to merge this as-is and then iterate on it later. @tarcieri thoughts?

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

3 participants