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

[Philip Reames via llvm-dev]

Overall, +1 from me.

I have a few concerns about the detail, but adopting this with the 
attitude that we're expecting to iterate on the process itself seems 
like a step in the right direction.

I'll simply list my concerns as I think each of these has been expanded 
on down thread by others.

1) Length of review period - two weeks is too short.

2) Who selects review managers - I'd be fine with Chris having final 
call.  I also think concerns about selection can largely be handled on a 
case by case basis as part of review feedback.

3) I'd prefer llvm-dev over another mailing list for now.  We could 
switch later, but I don't see a strong reason to switch now.

4) I think it needs to be very clear that reviewers are only expected to 
have read the current proposal.  It should be the responsibility of 
author to summarize previous discussion.  I consider the "this was 
discussed in X old thread" an anti pattern for this type of discussion.

Philip


On 6/2/20 1:19 PM, Chris Lattner via llvm-dev 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
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> LLVM Developers mailing list
> llvm-dev at lists.llvm.org
> https://lists.llvm.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/llvm-dev
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.llvm.org/pipermail/llvm-dev/attachments/20200610/33370cac/attachment.html>