Stephen Kitt

@sftim is it up to me to request a technical review from SIG CLI?

> Hi. The blog team is short on capacity, so reviews are taking a long time. How about we aim for publication on the 2nd of December? OK, I’ve amended...

> If we do publish this, I want to understand who the audience is > > * Kubernetes contributors? > * Kubernetes users? > * People writimg `kubectl` plugins? >...

> Sorry about the wait; this is our oldest open PR. > > To avoid it getting overlooked, would you be willing to open a new PR and mention this...

> @skitt I'm new around this repo, but I think there's just a lack of blog reviewers. > > I'll post it to the sig-docs-blog channel for more visibility. Right,...

> I have already done this. It does not need a pr It’s just confusing because it’s done in https://github.com/antlr4-go/antlr but not in https://github.com/antlr/antlr4/tree/dev/runtime/Go/antlr/v4 and the former says it’s a...

> Yes, but it referee to the build and release. You only use tagged versions OK, sorry for the noise.

@jimidle your changes seem to have been lost, I’m guessing they were deleted when https://github.com/antlr4-go/antlr was updated from this repository — I can’t find your equivalent changes any more. In...

To move forward on this, let’s work on terminology documents (as mentioned by Laura above), and then revisit this position statement to focus on the concepts that are important to...

I just added a missing space. /lgtm /approve