Merge pull request #24 from avadacatavra/meeting1

adding meeting 1 notes

Author: avadacatavra

meeting-notes/20180913.md

@@ -0,0 +1,43 @@
+# Meeting 1: 13 Sept 2018
+
+The active discussion is still Data Representation. It seems like we’re ready for writeups for the following issues:
+
+- [structs](https://github.com/rust-rfcs/unsafe-code-guidelines/issues/11) and [tuples](https://github.com/rust-rfcs/unsafe-code-guidelines/issues/12): niko
+- [references and pointers](http://16https://github.com/rust-rfcs/unsafe-code-guidelines/issues/16): avadacatavra
+- [function pointers](https://github.com/rust-rfcs/unsafe-code-guidelines/issues/14): nicole mazzuca
+- [packed/align](https://github.com/rust-rfcs/unsafe-code-guidelines/issues/17): **<this could be you!>**
+
+We’re still looking for a consensus/further discussion on:
+
+- [enums](https://github.com/rust-rfcs/unsafe-code-guidelines/issues/10)
+- [unions](https://github.com/rust-rfcs/unsafe-code-guidelines/issues/13)
+- [integers/floating points](https://github.com/rust-rfcs/unsafe-code-guidelines/issues/9)
+
+If you’re interested in working on a writeup, please comment on the issue. I’ll be adding some tags to help us organize this. See zulip for the [full log](https://rust-lang.zulipchat.com/#narrow/stream/136281-wg-unsafe-code-guidelines/topic/meeting.202018-09-13).
+
+##How is the format working out?
+Overall, it seems like the github discussions are productive. However, there’s the question of how we produce concrete summaries/writeups/more permanent artifacts (aka how are we actually writing this reference book?).
+
+**Who/what/why/when/how of writeups**
+We should designate people responsible for writeups earlier. This is also a place where we should reach out to members of the community who might be interested/involved in topics elsewhere, but not necessarily aware of the discussions occurring here.
+
+The writeups should reflect whatever consensus was reached in the GH issue—someone will summarize the discussion and open a PR on the mdbook in the repo. We can then iterate on the PR with comments/reviews/suggestions. If needed, we can always merge a starting point PR (for documentation and revisitation) or close a PR if it looks like the topic needs more discussion.
+
+So, what do I mean by **consensus**? We don’t need to agree on what the answer is, but we should agree on what the questions are. Some things to think about:
+
+- how is this topic currently handled? is this appropriate?
+- what are different approaches and tradeoffs?
+- what do people need to keep in mind when dealing with this topic?
+- if there isn’t necessarily a right way, is there a wrong way?
+
+We’ll see how this writeup process goes and document it once something seems like it works.
+
+##What’s next?
+
+- Oops! We forgot to add a [license](https://github.com/rust-rfcs/unsafe-code-guidelines/issues/20).
+- Start writing up the Data Representation chapter
+  - Do we want to say anything about other representations (e.g. `Box`, slices, fat pointers…)
+  - Should we have an ABI section
+- Keep discussing topics that aren’t ready for writeups
+- Figure out how to do writeups more effectively
+