chore(docs): zarf principles draft #3562
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Brandt Keller <brandt.keller@defenseunicorns.com>
✅ Deploy Preview for zarf-docs ready!
To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify project configuration. |
Codecov Report✅ All modified and coverable lines are covered by tests. 🚀 New features to boost your workflow:
|
Signed-off-by: Brandt Keller <brandt.keller@defenseunicorns.com>
Signed-off-by: Brandt Keller <brandt.keller@defenseunicorns.com>
Signed-off-by: Brandt Keller <brandt.keller@defenseunicorns.com>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This document looks great, and I'm generally in agreement with the principals. "measured by" includes many metrics, both qualitative and quantitative. Is the plan to work towards measuring and reporting these metrics over time? Or is the intent to say that these are the concrete impacts that these goals should have on Zarf?
I'd say it's a mix of both that we can refine and report on iteratively where valuable. Some are guardrails - IE "Adoption of signed releases and integrity verification methods" <- we already do this but we want to ensure we don't violate this explicitly. Others are continual signals that need feedback loops - "Ensuring compatibility with industry standards". Then we get to things we can measure -> binary/package size / time to first successful deployment/ etc. Broad enough to help us find applicable paths for new suggestions or existing logic. |
Signed-off-by: Brandt Keller <brandt.keller@defenseunicorns.com> Signed-off-by: Cade Thomas <cadethomas23@gmail.com>
Description
Zarf needs objective criteria for reviewing new or modified behavior when submitted from any entity.
This will better allow capability review without the potential for interpreting the decision as subjective.
Related Issue
Fixes #3552
Relates to #
Checklist before merging