3 ms·
Should I use GitHub discussions or GitHub PRs with Markdown files to track RFCs?
Dear HN
Many GitHub projects e.g. rust use a combination of markdown files and pull requests to submit and obtain feedback on RFCs. What about using GitHub discussions instead? You could use labels to assign a status, and update the body of the discussion as you receive feedback. It will mean that the RFC is searchable before it's merged in, and you can make use of the nested threads. On the other hand, when using a PR mechanism RFC and feedback are more clearly separated and less likely to "bleed" into each other. The PR status also provides an intuitive mechanism for tracking RFC status. Finally, feedback can be explicitly linked to lines in the markdown file.
- zoezoezoezoe 2y agoThere's a lot of different ways to manage and track RFCs, and honestly, it's really just up to your preference, you could use github issues, discussions, pull requests, a separate repository, or an external tool. Democratized projects, like Rust, or Wayland seem to gravitate to using pull requests. Personally, I think markdown files might be a better solution than github discussions, but it's really up to however you decide it should be managed.
- sumau 2y agothanks for the feedback, I was hoping for a more clear-cut answer but I guess there isn't :-)