On Sat, 2019-07-13 at 12:26 -0500, Ian Stapleton Cordasco wrote: > On Sat, Jul 13, 2019 at 12:23 PM Stephen Finucane <step...@that.guru> wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I'd like to explore the idea of adopting the 'doc8' tool within the > > PyCQA organization. For anyone not familiar with the tool, 'doc8' > > markets itself as "an opinionated style checker for rst (with basic > > support for plain text) styles of documentation." It's currently > > maintained within the OpenStack community but there have been some > > valid concerns raised recently regarding the health of the 'doc8' tool > > [1]. While it is extensively used within OpenStack (and outside it too, > > fwiw), it's very much secondary to the core goal of OpenStack itself, > > which probably explains the lack of attention it's received over the > > last few years. > > > > While 'doc8' is not a checker for Python code itself, it is Python- > > based, is a "quality tool", and rST+docutils/Sphinx remains the > > documentation tool of choice for the Python community. For this reason, > > I think PyCQA might be a good fit as a parent organization. The other > > possible parent organizations I've been looking at are sphinx- > > doc/sphinx-contrib and docutils, but doc8 isn't actually Sphinx-based, > > which kind of rules out the former, while the docutils community are > > _still_ insisting on Sourceforge and Subversion, ruling them out :( > > > > Does anyone else think PyCQA might possibly make a good fit for 'doc8'? > > If so, I'll raise the idea formally within OpenStack and start on the > > paperwork to move things across. If not, I'd welcome other ideas for > > where this useful project could live. > > > > Stephen > > > > [1] > > http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-discuss/2019-July/007669.html > > I thiink it's definitely a fit given its focus. I don't know that > there's anyone in the PyCQA, however, who has the cycles to maintain > it. Would you and Sorin be willing to maintain it inside the PyCQA? > I'd be happy to set things up so that you both could add more > maintainers easily.
Yeah, that would be the expectation, though I would hope that some other interested parties might eventually discover the project and pitch in, of course (wishful thinking, perhaps :)). What are the next steps? Stephen > Cheers, > Ian _______________________________________________ code-quality mailing list code-quality@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/code-quality
