Hello,
For practical reasons, the TechCom requires all RfC's that are ready to be discussed to be (i) fully documented on phabricator (desc); and (ii) for the discussion to happen there too.
Topic on Talk:Requests for comment/Themes in core
Is there a link to where this is documented?
Yes, at Requests for comment/Process.
From Requests for comment/Process:
- You may also publish your proposal on mediawiki.org instead, as subpage of Requests for comment. If publishing on mediawiki.org, also create a Phabricator task that points to the mediawiki.org page from its description.
This is what I did. Is this documentation incorrect?
Oh, hmm, you're right, it seems that the Committee didn't update their documentation when that changed a few years ago, sorry.
There've been a few other RfCs done similarly over the past couple of years, with the main text of the RfC on mw.org, and task with only a small summary for actual tracking on phabricator, so I don't think the policy is quite that strict, whatever it is.
Mind you, if it would be better to have more of a summary on the task itself (someone else just replaced the existing task description with a link here, since it was pretty self-explanatory in the broad strokes from the name already), such that it can thus be better discussed there, that I could certainly understand - I'd rather prefer the discussion itself occur on phabricator as well. Could we perhaps get someone from the committee to actually clarify what is expected, however?
Well, Marko is on the Committee, and he started this thread in asking you to move it… :-)
Indeed, it hasn't been documented, but we are trying to institute a single place for RfC's so that it's clearer to people how and where to interact, but also to make it easy for TechCom members to follow all RfC-related changes. In order words, we trying to make some order :)
This is not to say that you have to move the document, you can copy/paste it onto the task, but if your proposal is ready to be discussed (which judging by your email to wikitech-l it is - thnx for sending it, btw!), we do require the text to be on Phabricator and for the discussion to happen there.
I'm sorry, this is ridiculous. We submitted this in december; you were the one who updated the task description for it on phabricator to only link here; you were the one who marked it as under discussion then, and left no comment that anything was wrong; and now it's wrong? Meanwhile you still haven't updated the documentation that I spent several weeks wading through to get an understanding of what was expected, so I'm still really not sure what you actually mean - documenting something and copying an entire wiki page into a task description are two very different things. Frankly, that also doesn't make a whole lot of sense - most of this page is just explaining the context; I really don't think phabricator is even an appropriate place for that in the first place? Now having that explanation here on mw.org, with a link and more of the proposed plan and the technical details on phabricator as the actual RfC might make a lot of sense, but you were the one who removed that, so... what exactly do you expect from me, here?
Please, please figure out the process before you expect anyone to follow it. Don't try to retroactively apply it, do introduce yourself so people actually have any idea who you are, and seriously, update the documentation. Some of us are not salaried and frankly don't really have the time to go running around in circles on this.