Proposal: Naming for features #1411
Labels
A-common
Area:common issues that not related to specific pillar
release:required-for-stable
Must be resolved before GA release, or nice to have before GA.
Milestone
After our discussions in the SIG yesterday and some prior conversations we should probably get some sort of alignement of feature naming.
The most recent example here:
Originally posted by @cijothomas in #1410 (comment)
I think some goals would be:
We know we should be using
kebab-case
. However we have a couple different dimensions to consider.I know that @TommyCpp had mentioned just documenting things. Does that mean just putting in our documentation that a feature is experimental?
Someone else mentioned default being the marker for stable or not.
If we look to the rust compiler there's a concept of a nightly compiler which you can use and once you're using that you can enable features which are unstable but I think this may not map 100%.
Personally I see a couple ways, but I'd rather hear first from the rest of the group.
References:
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: