Upayavira wrote:
Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
...
Sounds good, and as a first step this could be our own contrib directory.
No it wouldn't, because we wouldn't agree what should go there.
I think we could agree about some of the existing blocks, but never
mind. But we are not forced to continue to have sloopy rules for how to
adding functionality, a contrib directory could be useful for new blocks
that not have any community support yet or that are outside our main scope.
My
suggestion is to, as you did with the samples, leave all blocks as they
are, and start _hightlighting_ the ones we consider to be best
practices. Then, after some extended period if time we may decide to
purge the ones that have not received any highlighting, but highlighting
core blocks works much better than deprecating old blocks that people
may be using.
(And by way of recommendation of this approach :-) this is the approach
that Buddhists throughout the centuries used to deal with teachings that
had grown stale. They didn't say "that is a bad teaching", they said,
"hey, we've got a higher teaching".)
So, basically, until we've got blocks functioning, and have had them so
for _some_ time, we should do nothing more than highlighting and marking
up with meta-data for our blocks. Our blocks system and block repository
is going to create a new organism (which, yes, could well want a contrib
group elsewhere such as Niclas suggested), but I want to allow for that
organism to grow, well, organically :-)
Sound good. The important point IMO is that we start to be explicit
about our priorities in some way. And highlighting might be easier to do
than removing.
/Daniel
