You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
I'm building a tool for RFCs. It's called CQ2. It's free, open-source, self-hostable, and it's in its early stages.
I'm curious to know if you all are dissatisfied with using GitHub PRs for the ERCs. PRs are fundamentally for code review, so commenting on text feels like a pretty meh experience, with no formatting, no threads, etc.
For testing, I took a Discourse discussion on a PEP and simulated it on CQ2: https://cq2.co/app/document/demo/v1. Try opening and creating some threads there! Feels much better organised, easier to follow and easier to engage with, right?
CQ2 has inline comments, infinite threads, a separate place for general comments, ability to resolve threads (to know what exactly remains to be discussed) and better document versioning.
If you all like it, I would love to get feedback and work with you all to shape it in its early stages. Thanks!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
Hey everyone,
I'm building a tool for RFCs. It's called CQ2. It's free, open-source, self-hostable, and it's in its early stages.
I'm curious to know if you all are dissatisfied with using GitHub PRs for the ERCs. PRs are fundamentally for code review, so commenting on text feels like a pretty meh experience, with no formatting, no threads, etc.
For testing, I took a Discourse discussion on a PEP and simulated it on CQ2: https://cq2.co/app/document/demo/v1. Try opening and creating some threads there! Feels much better organised, easier to follow and easier to engage with, right?
CQ2 has inline comments, infinite threads, a separate place for general comments, ability to resolve threads (to know what exactly remains to be discussed) and better document versioning.
If you all like it, I would love to get feedback and work with you all to shape it in its early stages. Thanks!
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: