[riot-notifications] [RIOT-OS/RIOT] doc/memos: RDM Runtime Configuration Architecture (#10622)

José Alamos notifications at github.com
Thu Jan 17 14:44:22 CET 2019

> This means that an implementation PR can, and may often be, merged before a design RDM PR.

I would say it's nice to have an RDM before an implementation, because it helps gathering consensus and explaining design decisions. 

> There seems to me to be some ambiguity around what a minor revision consists of, compared to when an RDM should be deprecated, which I've attempted to address here: #10798.

IMO RDMs should focus more in "clarity" (help other developers understand what the motivations are, provide useful resources, explain why it's designed that way, etc) rather than "quality" (strict definitions, sharp scope, strict rules, etc). While I agree it's always better to have a perfect document, in practice there will be an overhead that doesn't necessarily reflect in a better implementation.

E.g in this document we are trying to explain why we think the architecture is suitable for RIOT and why we plan to integrate the [RIOT Registry](https://github.com/leandrolanzieri/RIOT/tree/riot_registry) into RIOT. It might (or maybe not) be a good approach for Runtime Configuration System and that's why I think these kind of discussions should also be addressed here (so if this gets rejected, implementers don't waste time writing code that will never get merged)

Because of this, I would personally prefer to focus more on design issues with this document and evident problems (typos, design not clear enough, etc). After #10798 gets resolved we can add a new revision to this document (or deprecate). 

You are receiving this because you are subscribed to this thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub:
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.riot-os.org/pipermail/notifications/attachments/20190117/93d66fb7/attachment-0001.html>

More information about the notifications mailing list