12 Matching Annotations
- Jan 2024
-
sonec.org sonec.org
-
TRAINING PROGRAM
-
for: SoNeC - SRG / TPF gamified rapid whole system change, SRG / TPF proposal
-
SRG / TPF project proposals for SONEC communities
- Emerge candidates for a global 3rd political party with no money from special interests
- education,
- recruitment
- training
- as per
- James Hansen
- Progressive International
- this reflects the polycrisis's entangled nature:
- climate crisis
- political crisis
- Cosmolocal production network
- Bootstrap local WEconomy via community owned cooperatives:
- bioeconomy
- concentrated organic produce production
- agroforestry production
- renewable energy
- low cost desalinated water
- bioeconomy
- Open citizen science project on local climate departure as proxy for economic impacts of climate change
- Deep Humanity / BEing journeys
- Gamified rapid whole system change via:
- downscaled earth system boundaries and
- doughnut economics
- Cascading Social Tipping Point Theory
- Youth afterschool climate activism clubs
- Network of sustainable restaurants for meetings, talks and presentations
- Local community economics to RELOCALIZE the economy
- Jan 1, 2024 adders
- Appeal to local north districts of cities
- Wealth2Wellth program to show High Net Worth Individuals (HNWI) living in wealthy local north communities climate change trends that are occurring in realtime to show present and near future sea level rise and forest fire impacts on their expensive beachfront and forest properties respectively
- sister ward / sister city partnerships
- create local north / south as well as global north / south partnerships for upliftment and
- creating more wealth in local south communities as well as wellth
- creating more wellth in local north communities
- create local north / south as well as global north / south partnerships for upliftment and
- climate crisis / polycrisis education and motivational speaking from top thought leaders via global audience outreach to the SoNeC global network of youth and communty SoNeC hubs
- many ordinary people do not realize the urgency of our situation or have become so jaded. Personal interaction with leading authorities can make a difference
- Appeal to local north districts of cities
- Emerge candidates for a global 3rd political party with no money from special interests
-
-
- Jan 2022
-
-
Moving forward I'd rather see {#await} being removed than adding more {#await}. But that's just from my experience and I'm sure there are use-cases for it.
-
- Jun 2021
-
babeljs.io babeljs.io
-
Babel implements multiple variants of this proposal to help TC39 test and gather feedback from the community. As with all proposals, expect changes in the future.
-
- Mar 2021
-
www.chevtek.io www.chevtek.io
-
Sure sometimes my changes get rejected, but it almost always comes with a reason why and I can work together with the maintainer to come up with a sensible solution to my issue.
-
- Nov 2020
-
github.com github.com
Tags
Annotators
URL
-
-
github.com github.com
-
I'd like to go with an RFC-based governance model (similar to Rust, Ember or Swift) that looks something like this: new features go through a public RFC that describes the motivation for the change, a detailed implementation description, a description on how to document or teach the change (for kpm, that would roughly be focused around how it affected the usual workflows), any drawbacks or alternatives, and any open questions that should be addressed before merging. the change is discussed until all of the relevant arguments have been debated and the arguments are starting to become repetitive (they "reach a steady state") the RFC goes into "final comment period", allowing people who weren't paying close attention to every proposal to have a chance to weigh in with new arguments. assuming no new arguments are presented, the RFC is merged by consensus of the core team and the feature is implemented. All changes, regardless of their source, go through this process, giving active community members who aren't on the core team an opportunity to participate directly in the future direction of the project. (both because of proposals they submit and ones from the core team that they contribute to)
-
Tags
- change proposal workflow: RFCs
- attracting contributors
- governance
- welcoming feedback
- yarn
- software projects: governance
- soliciting feedback
- build concensus
- allowing sufficient time for discussion/feedback/debate before a final decision is made
- open-source projects: allowing community (who are not on core team) to influence/affect/steer the direction of the project
- open-source projects: process
Annotators
URL
-
-
github.com github.com
-
The RFC repo (where the reaction was strongly positive) is the place for discussion about what features to add; the decision has been made.
-
- Sep 2020
-
github.com github.com
-
Please focus on explaining the motivation so that if this RFC is not accepted, the motivation could be used to develop alternative solutions. In other words, enumerate the constraints you are trying to solve without coupling them too closely to the solution you have in mind.
Tags
- contribution guidelines: should explain motivation for change
- defining the problem clearly is as valuable coming up with specific implementation/solution
- iterative process: building on previous attempts/work
- iterative process
- answer the "why?"
- okay for proposal to not be accepted
Annotators
URL
-
-
github.com github.com
-
Yarn also has an RFC process which may offer a better discussion platform compared to this GitHub issue.
-
-
github.com github.com
-
Many changes, including bug fixes and documentation improvements can be implemented and reviewed via the normal GitHub pull request workflow. Some changes though are "substantial", and we ask that these be put through a bit of a design process and produce a consensus among the Yarn core team. The "RFC" (request for comments) process is intended to provide a consistent and controlled path for new features to enter the project.
-