Skip to content

Test: PR-number-based proposal workflow#1

Closed
k-wall wants to merge 2 commits intomainfrom
stop-the-collisions
Closed

Test: PR-number-based proposal workflow#1
k-wall wants to merge 2 commits intomainfrom
stop-the-collisions

Conversation

@k-wall
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Owner

@k-wall k-wall commented Apr 24, 2026

Testing the new proposal numbering workflow on my fork before submitting to upstream.

This PR implements Rob's suggestion from kroxylicious#95 to use PR numbers as proposal identifiers.

Changes:

  • Simplified proposals/README.md (removed index tables)
  • Updated proposal template with workflow instructions
  • Added GitHub workflow to check proposal numbering
  • Added MIGRATION_GUIDE.md for existing proposals

Testing: This workflow should run and check for correctly numbered proposal files.

⚠️ Proposal File Numbering

This PR contains proposal files that don't follow the expected numbering scheme:

  • proposals/000-test-workflow.md
  • proposals/016-virtual-cluster-lifecycle.md
  • proposals/017-aws-kms-credentials-config-restructure.md
  • proposals/018-aws-kms-eks-authentication.md
  • proposals/019-strimzi-v1-api-migration.md

Expected naming: proposals/001-<descriptive-name>.md

Please rename your proposal file to use PR #1:

git mv proposals/000-<name>.md proposals/001-<name>.md
# or rename from current name to correct name
git commit -m "Rename proposal to use PR number 1"
git push

See proposals/README.md for the complete workflow.

This introduces a proposal index (README.md) for the proposals directory
to solve the problem of colliding proposal numbers.

Currently, multiple open PRs have chosen proposal numbers that conflict
with already-merged proposals. This creates confusion and makes it
difficult to maintain stable identifiers for proposals - which is
essential for productive discussion on the mailing list.

The new process:
1. Authors create proposals with temporary filenames (nnn-*)
2. A separate PR to this README allocates the next sequential number
3. Authors rename their proposal once the number is allocated
4. The index is updated again when proposals are accepted

This ensures:
- Proposal numbers are allocated chronologically
- No number collisions occur
- Each proposal gets a stable identifier before mailing list discussion
- Clear visibility of open vs. accepted proposals

Current collisions resolved by this index:
- PR kroxylicious#70, kroxylicious#82, kroxylicious#83, kroxylicious#88, kroxylicious#89 all have numbers conflicting with accepted
  proposals and have been allocated new sequential numbers (016-024)

Assisted-By: Claude Sonnet 4.5 <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Keith Wall <[email protected]>
@k-wall k-wall force-pushed the stop-the-collisions branch 4 times, most recently from 0b46b70 to 48eec63 Compare April 24, 2026 14:51
This change simplifies the proposal numbering system by using PR numbers
as proposal identifiers, eliminating number collisions and removing the
need for a separate allocation process.

Changes:
- Simplified proposals/README.md to focus on author workflow
  - Removed index tables (directory listing serves as the index)
  - Streamlined instructions for creating and renaming proposals
- Updated proposal template with workflow instructions
- Added GitHub workflow to automatically check proposal numbering
  - Updates PR description when proposal files don't match PR number
  - Provides exact commands to fix naming issues
  - Removes warning once corrected
- Added notification script for existing open PRs
  - After merge, run notify-open-prs.sh to ask authors to rebase
  - Workflow will automatically guide them through renaming

Proposals 001-019 retain their original numbers.

Co-Authored-By: Claude Sonnet 4.5 <[email protected]>
@k-wall k-wall force-pushed the stop-the-collisions branch from 48eec63 to 5a06b57 Compare April 24, 2026 14:52
@k-wall k-wall closed this Apr 27, 2026
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Labels

None yet

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant