Wichert Akkerman wrote:
Previously Daniel Nouri said:
Do you agree that we put the documentation in the top-level directory?
I.e. INSTALL.txt, README.txt etc. They shouldn't really go *inside* the
package I hear from Ian. Would also give us less duplication between
the plone_app and the plone_core (should we rename?) templates.
I always prefer to have the top-level directory be as clean as possible,
containing only diretories and essential files.
For documentation that means I personally prefer to put only the bits that
are essential for a users first encounter with the package in the top level
directory: the licensing files, simple installation instructions and a
generic readme. I put all other, more detailed, information in a doc
Oops, I actually *meant* a docs/ directory in the top level, like
'PloneExample/docs'. Although distutils wants a README.txt I think in
the top level 'PloneExample/'.
I think that for distribution (project) names we should use names like
"PloneExample", rather than "plone.example".
Names containing dots are all the rage though :). I'm not sure if casing in
names survives all media and hosting services correctly.
I know that the convention is to have distribution names in CamelCase.
It's also nicer to the eyes; you don't want 'plone.form' as the name of
your project in the Cheeseshop.
Framework-Team mailing list