Re: labels for issues and pull requests in document repositories

I think I replied to something like this earlier, and we should add something to the Editor’s Guide. Each repository has it’s own set of labels (for example, this for rdf-concepts [1]) and in some cases they have comments describing their use. For Pull Requsts, I’ve been using the following:

* spec:editorial – Changes are limited to things that don’t change the meaning of the document, either normative or informative. Examples include spelling/grammar change and fixing links and identifiers, as necessary.

* spec:enhancement – Informative/non-normative changes to the spec. Improvements to Security Considerations would be an example.

* spec:substantive – Normative changes to the spec. Changes that affect normative behavior, for example N-Quads Canonicalization changes.

* needs-discussion – Flags an issue or PR for discussion on a call, or ideally within the issue itself. It should be removed when the points of contention have been resolved.

These labels may be useful for issues as well as PRs.

Some tags will automatically notify other groups, or may be used by other groups for horizontal review. For example, “security-tracker” and “i18n-tracker”. Others control the automated creation of Errata (not significant until REC), for example “Editorial”, “Errata”, and “ErratumRaised”.

Adding descriptions for all the labels across all the repositories would be useful, but probably requires some of the tools that PA put in place to set them up originally.

Gregg Kellogg
gregg@greggkellogg.net <mailto:gregg@greggkellogg.net>

[1] https://github.com/w3c/rdf-concepts/labels

> On Mar 29, 2023, at 6:50 AM, Peter F. Patel-Schneider <pfpschneider@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> There are a lot of labels that can be applied to issues and pull requests. Is there a document on which ones we should be using and what they mean?
> 
> peter
>