[Om] Call for Discussion: CD editing process (technical)

[Michael Kohlhase]

Probably a good discussion topic for the OpenMath workshop.

Michael


On 30.05.18 17:34, Michael Kohlhase wrote:
>
> Dear James, dear all,
>
> On 29.04.18 11:15, James Davenport wrote:
>> Thanks for starting this debate: a useful corollary to the decision
>> to go GitHub. I propose that “CD Editor” becomes plural, and we start
>> having a team.
> I second that, that would get us around the
> "single-point-of-failure/delay" problem.
>> I have no immediate intention of stepping down, but Michael’s Post
>> has made me realise how ad hominem the current system is. Presumably
>> the editors should essentially (I.e. apart from sysadmins) be those
>> with push rights to this repository.  
> I would suggest a new "team" of CD Editors at the GithHub level, and
> have three editors and James as Editor-in-chief. a
>> A change log would be necessary.
> I think the GitHub log should be sufficient, if people give good
> commit messages.
>
> Michael
>> I wonder (no real views either way - what do those with experience of
>> larger/longer lasting projects think) whether a simple text (probably
>> actually HTML) file will suffice. 
>>
>> James
>>
>> Sent from my iPhone
>>
>> On 29 Apr 2018, at 09:42, Michael Kohlhase <michael.kohlhase at fau.de
>> <mailto:michael.kohlhase at fau.de>> wrote:
>>
>>> Dear all,
>>>
>>> as you know, we have been reorganizing the OpenMath resources and
>>> web site as multiple repositories at [1]
>>>
>>> In particular we have the new CDs repository [2], which has the CD
>>> resources and feeds the CD web site [3]
>>>
>>> The idea is that [2] should facilitate CD development by providing
>>> public source access, issues, pull requests, and notifications. Now,
>>> the first outside user (Jacob Beal) has taken advantage of this
>>> first by raising an issue [4], and then providing a pull request [5]
>>> which is currently being discussed. In a nutshell the proposal is to
>>> add negated binary connectives nor, nand, and nxor to logic1.ocd.
>>>
>>> So far so good, but this raises the question of how the CD approval
>>> process should be organized (technically).
>>>
>>> The OpenMath Standard [6] only says
>>>
>>>
>>>       > 4.5 Content Dictionaries Reviewing Process
>>>
>>> > The /OpenMath/ Society is responsible for implementing a review
>>> and referee
>>> > process to assess the accuracy of the mathematical content of
>>> Content Dictionaries.
>>> > The status (see |CDStatus|) and/or the version number (see
>>> |CDVersion| ) of a Content |
>>> > Dictionary may change as a result of this review process.
>>>
>>> which leaves the process open and the OpenMath Society delegates the
>>> responsibility to its CD Editor (James Davenport).
>>>
>>> James and I have started discussing the technical process of
>>> approving CD revisions. We propose that we make the GitHub-supported
>>> process we have started with Jacob's proposal the standard and
>>> document it in the README of  [2].
>>>
>>> Here is what we think the process should be.
>>>
>>>  1. An extension proposal is made via a GitHub issue at [2] and
>>>     discussed there.
>>>  2. The discussion is concretized into a pull request (PR) to [2]
>>>     that is discussed further on the PR (including inline comments)
>>>     until all issues are resolved.
>>>  3. James explicitly approves the PR and someone with push rights
>>>     merges it.
>>>  4. the changes are announced and added to a changelog.
>>>
>>> We would like your input on this proposal (in particular what we
>>> should do for 4.)
>>>
>>> James & Michael
>>>
>>>
>>> [1] https://github.com/OpenMath
>>>
>>> [2] https://github.com/OpenMath/CDs
>>>
>>> [3] http://openmath.org/cd/
>>>
>>> [4] https://github.com/OpenMath/CDs/issues/32
>>>
>>> [5] https://github.com/OpenMath/CDs/pull/34
>>>
>>> [6]
>>> http://www.openmath.org/standard/om20-2017-07-22/omstd20.html#cdapprove
>>>
>>> [7]
>>>
>>> -- 
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> Prof. Dr. Michael Kohlhase,  http://kwarc.info/kohlhase, skype: mibein42
>>>
>>> Professur für Wissensrepräsentation & -verarbeitung
>>>   Informatik, FAU Erlangen Nürnberg, Martensstr. 3, D-91058 Erlangen, Room 11.139,
>>>   tel/fax: (49) 9131-85-64052/55, michael.kohlhase at fau.de 
>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Om mailing list
>>> Om at openmath.org <mailto:Om at openmath.org>
>>> http://mailman.openmath.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/om
>
> -- 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
> Prof. Dr. Michael Kohlhase,  http://kwarc.info/kohlhase, skype: mibein42
>
> Professur für Wissensrepräsentation & -verarbeitung
>   Informatik, FAU Erlangen Nürnberg, Martensstr. 3, D-91058 Erlangen, Room 11.139,
>   tel/fax: (49) 9131-85-64052/55, michael.kohlhase at fau.de 
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------

-- 
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Prof. Dr. Michael Kohlhase,  http://kwarc.info/kohlhase, skype: mibein42

Professur für Wissensrepräsentation & -verarbeitung
  Informatik, FAU Erlangen Nürnberg, Martensstr. 3, D-91058 Erlangen, Room 11.139,
  tel/fax: (49) 9131-85-64052/55, michael.kohlhase at fau.de 
----------------------------------------------------------------------

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.openmath.org/pipermail/om/attachments/20180530/0213e255/attachment-0001.html>