QtCS2024 Quo Vadis, TTLOFIR: Difference between revisions
(Copy talk abstract.) |
m (Add Minutes section heading) |
||
| Line 2: | Line 2: | ||
"Things to look out for in review" (https://wiki.qt.io/Things_To_Look_Out_For_In_Reviews) started as a low-entry-barrier way to collect guidelines surrounding code^Wgit-versioned contributions, to be distributed to "official" documents as time goes by. While I believe it had a positive impact on many Qt contributors already in the present form, I still see (too) many of the issues, discussed there, in approved code, suggesting that it may be time to migrate some of the content to said "official" format (QUIP? Qt Coding Standard (no, not the whitespace formatting guideline that currently carries the name)). Also, the number of contributions to TTLOFIR from others than myself remains relatively small (with an explicit shout-out to those who did contribute!). Seeing as the number of Qt contributors only continues to grow (itself a very healthy sign), I think the project is facing a bit of "didn't know; if known, didn't read; if read; didn't understand; if understood, didn't apply" going on. So this session is both to spread awareness, as well as discuss how the process to migrate TTLOFIR items to a more "official" format could look like. | "Things to look out for in review" (https://wiki.qt.io/Things_To_Look_Out_For_In_Reviews) started as a low-entry-barrier way to collect guidelines surrounding code^Wgit-versioned contributions, to be distributed to "official" documents as time goes by. While I believe it had a positive impact on many Qt contributors already in the present form, I still see (too) many of the issues, discussed there, in approved code, suggesting that it may be time to migrate some of the content to said "official" format (QUIP? Qt Coding Standard (no, not the whitespace formatting guideline that currently carries the name)). Also, the number of contributions to TTLOFIR from others than myself remains relatively small (with an explicit shout-out to those who did contribute!). Seeing as the number of Qt contributors only continues to grow (itself a very healthy sign), I think the project is facing a bit of "didn't know; if known, didn't read; if read; didn't understand; if understood, didn't apply" going on. So this session is both to spread awareness, as well as discuss how the process to migrate TTLOFIR items to a more "official" format could look like. | ||
=== Minutes === | |||
Revision as of 07:11, 5 September 2024
Abstract
"Things to look out for in review" (https://wiki.qt.io/Things_To_Look_Out_For_In_Reviews) started as a low-entry-barrier way to collect guidelines surrounding code^Wgit-versioned contributions, to be distributed to "official" documents as time goes by. While I believe it had a positive impact on many Qt contributors already in the present form, I still see (too) many of the issues, discussed there, in approved code, suggesting that it may be time to migrate some of the content to said "official" format (QUIP? Qt Coding Standard (no, not the whitespace formatting guideline that currently carries the name)). Also, the number of contributions to TTLOFIR from others than myself remains relatively small (with an explicit shout-out to those who did contribute!). Seeing as the number of Qt contributors only continues to grow (itself a very healthy sign), I think the project is facing a bit of "didn't know; if known, didn't read; if read; didn't understand; if understood, didn't apply" going on. So this session is both to spread awareness, as well as discuss how the process to migrate TTLOFIR items to a more "official" format could look like.