-
-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 30
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
How do we model notebook and cell metadata? #150
Comments
I think I grok the bulk of the proposal, but can I ask for clarification on this sentence?
Honestly it doesn't parse in my brain - how can something be modified without touching it? |
Please read my comment about why we implemented metadata using coarse granularity. jupyterlab/jupyterlab#12709 (comment) I'm all in favor of exposing a granular interface. As I said before, that could be easily done on top of the existing shared-model approach. |
Yes, this was a typo! I've updated the description to say:
|
Technical: can we please ensure that everyone has edit rights on team-compass to vote by clicking a checkbox? It looks that I cannot edit this post and hence vote by click. |
@krassowski You should be able to vote now. |
The voting period for this proposal has closed:
With a voting body of 14 council members, the quorum of 50% is met and the proposal passes. |
This issue is to call a vote on the proposal in jupyterlab/jupyterlab#12709
(Full text of top-line comment)
Problem
We have an open PR #12359 from @hbcarlos that refactors our models for notebooks and text documents to improve the real-time collaboration (RTC) user experience and APIs for extension developer. There are a couple of questions that are coming up in the review of that PR that are not really RTC questions. I am opening a few issues to help us reach consensus/vote to resolve those questions to make it easier for us to review and make decisions about #12359.
In the current issue, we are trying to answer the following question:
How do we model notebook and cell metadata in RTC?
There are two primary options under consideration:
There is a third option that is half-way between these two (only use a shared map at the top-level), but this option doesn't answer the actual question that is coming up in the review of #12359.
Proposed Solution
The proposed solution is that we should be able to model notebook and cell metadata as a nested set of shared types (option (2)) above. If we decide this is the right approach, we will then have to figure out how we get from where we are now to this north star (in JLab 4 or beyond). The key is that this would rule out us making decision now that would make it difficult or impossible to move in this direction over time.
Summary
Vote Yes if you agree with the following:
Vote No if you agree with the following:
@jupyterlab/jupyterlab-council votes
Edit: Fixed a typo pointed out in the comments.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: