[OSPO Book] Prepare for start of the Book v2 development process

[lenucksi]

Area

Website (build/theme/layout/assets)

Problem / Goal

Hi, the creation of the OSPO book v2 has been started. On todays call we agreed to do some of the work using a branch an then merge back selectively.

• I can't create new branches here, so I'd like to ask someone who can to please create the branch ospo-book-v2.
• It'd be nice to be able to filter for issues and PRs that are strictly ospo-book-v2 related. Thus I'd like to ask for the label ospo-book-v2 to be created.

Proposed change

No response

Areas to cover

• Build config update
• PR preview environments
• Linters / link-check / spell-check
• i18n build pipeline
• Netlify
• Redirect
• Sitemap
• Image/font optimization
• Dependabot
• CODEOWNERS / branch protection
• Licensing

Acceptance criteria

No response

Links

No response

[semioticrobotic]

Thanks for getting this started, @lenucksi. Regarding this:

It'd be nice to be able to filter for issues and PRs that are strictly ospo-book-v2 related. Thus I'd like to ask for the label ospo-book-v2 to be created.

I would suggest a different approach. Rather than create a new label, I would prefer we create a new project milestone to which we can attach issues. This would allow us to more effectively use certain features of GitHub Projects and better visualize our progress on the new version. GitHub does allow filtering by milestone, of course, so I believe this choice would still address your need.

[lenucksi]

Thanks for getting this started, @lenucksi. Regarding this:

It'd be nice to be able to filter for issues and PRs that are strictly ospo-book-v2 related. Thus I'd like to ask for the label ospo-book-v2 to be created.

I would suggest a different approach. Rather than create a new label, I would prefer we create a new project milestone to which we can attach issues. This would allow us to more effectively use certain features of GitHub Projects and better visualize our progress on the new version. GitHub does allow filtering by milestone, of course, so I believe this choice would still address your need.

Sure, the OSS-in-business peeps seem to use that too. Let's do that then regarding the label request.
A branch is still warranted I'd say, especially given that some tinkering with linting, actions etc. might happen as discussed in other issues.

[semioticrobotic]

A branch is still warranted I'd say, especially given that some tinkering with linting, actions etc. might happen as discussed in other issues.

For sure! I agree this is absolutely the best approach.

[lenucksi]

Great, now who's in charge of getting us there? Are your new GitHub rights sufficient for this @semioticrobotic? Or can @koozz or @anajsana help us?

[semioticrobotic]

I now have sufficient permissions, @lenucksi, and can do this. It's a holiday weekend here so I'll need just a day or two to set it up.

[lenucksi]

I now have sufficient permissions, @lenucksi, and can do this. It's a holiday weekend here so I'll need just a day or two to set it up.

Got it, enjoy the holidays then!

[semioticrobotic]

Before we cut the ospo-book-v2 branch, would it be a good idea to attempt to merge some of these outstanding PRs so our main branch is up to date?

@julianaconde and @fer-correa: What is the status of #702, #703, #704, and #705? Can these be merged or should they be closed?

@lenucksi: What do you make of the open dependency bumps and linter notices from dependabot? Are these worth addressing prior to v2 so the code is clean before we cut the new branch (#733, #734, #735, #736, #737)?

@anajsana and @alice-sowerby: Are you finished with the new issue template in #711 and #718? Can these be merge or discarded?

Just thinking it might be a good idea to get the proverbial house in order (if we're able) before cutting a new major branch for active development.

[lenucksi]

Before we cut the ospo-book-v2 branch, would it be a good idea to attempt to merge some of these outstanding PRs so our main branch is up to date?

Yup, that'd be great.

@lenucksi: What do you make of the open dependency bumps and linter notices from dependabot? Are these worth addressing prior to v2 so the code is clean before we cut the new branch (#733, #734, #735, #736, #737)?

Most are low risk. One likely needs a bump on the netlify.toml. @koozz chimed in on the dependabot activation and and the successive PRs, so may he chime in on that here too. Let's get as many of them in as we can. I lack the rights to do any of this.

Just thinking it might be a good idea to get the proverbial house in order (if we're able) before cutting a new major branch for active development.

Absolutely.

[fer-correa]

Hi @semioticrobotic

PR #702 is under review, and many of the corrections are applicable to the other PRs (#703 , #704 and #705 ). I've already requested that they be reviewed before proceeding with a repetitive review process.

In any case, I asked for attention to be paid to these PRs again.

[semioticrobotic]

Thanks, @fer-correa! Really appreciate that!