[llvm-dev] [PROPOSAL] Introduce a new LLVM process to resolve contentious decisions

[Krzysztof Parzyszek via llvm-dev]

A part of the problem with “chiming in late” is that people don’t have time to read everything, or even to continuously keep track of what’s going on.  I don’t think that people in such position will want to be review managers and take on moderating further discussion.  My guess is that they might be inclined to just give up unless the proposal is straight up catastrophic.

On a different note..  On more than one occasion, there would be disagreements regarding the interpretation of the official project policies.  In the specific cases I remember they related to the downstream/out-of-tree projects.  Person A would say “this affects OOT projects”, while person B would say “we should have no concerns about what’s not in tree”.  What consequences do you see coming out of resolving these controversies?  Would they be “precedents” for the purposes of interpretation of policies?


--
Krzysztof Parzyszek  kparzysz at quicinc.com<mailto:kparzysz at quicinc.com>   AI tools development

From: llvm-dev <llvm-dev-bounces at lists.llvm.org> On Behalf Of Chris Lattner via llvm-dev
Sent: Monday, June 8, 2020 4:21 PM
To: llvm-dev <llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org>
Subject: [EXT] Re: [llvm-dev] [PROPOSAL] Introduce a new LLVM process to resolve contentious decisions

Thank you to Mehdi and Kit for their feedback on this thread so far - I’d really love to hear from others in the community as well, even if it is a simple “+1 this sounds great” or “I’m concerned about XYZ specific aspect of this” or “-1, LLVM has no problems making decisions” :-)

-Chris


On Jun 2, 2020, at 1:19 PM, Chris Lattner <clattner at nondot.org<mailto:clattner at nondot.org>> wrote:

Hi all,

Following up on the extensive discussions since January, many of us would like to put in place a process to improve LLVM’s decision making process for contentious issues.  I’ve put together a proposal for how this works, and am recursively using it to get feedback on the process itself.  Thank you to the many people who contributed great ideas and improvements during the pitch phases and early drafts of the doc.

Because this is a weird case, I’m not setting up the standard review manager team for this.  We’ll wing it, and if it doesn’t work out, we can try again.

-Chris

——

Hello LLVM community,

The review of "Introduce a new LLVM process to resolve contentious decisions" begins now and runs through
June 12, 2020. The proposal is available online<https://github.com/llvm/llvm-www/blob/master/proposals/LP0001-LLVMDecisionMaking.md>.

Feedback is an important part of the LLVM Proposal process. All review feedback
should be either on this forum thread or, if you would like to keep your feedback
private, directly to one of the review managers.

**What goes into a review?**

The goal of the review process is to improve the proposal under review through
constructive criticism and, eventually, determine the direction of LLVM. When
writing your response, here are some questions you might want to answer in your
review:

*   What is your evaluation of the proposal?  What positive or negative
    implications would accepting this have?
*   Do you have experience from other communities that relates to this
    issue and is important to consider?
*   How involved have you been in the LLVM project?  Frequent contributor,
    occasional contributor, user of LLVM libraries, user of LLVM-based tools,
    or other?
*   Self Evaluation: How much effort did you put into your review and how
    knowledgeable are you about this area? For example, a quick reading or an
    in-depth study?

In addition to your opinion and thoughts, please include any additional
framing that may be useful.

Thank you,

Chris Lattner
Review Manager



-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200608/4b8cf500/attachment.html>