Ross Patterson <[email protected]> writes:

> So far, much of the Plone 4 work has happened in narrower circles to
> free it up for prototyping, visioning, and imagining new approaches.
> This has been in part to isolate such a process from the paralysis
> that can come from discussion of edge cases or disagreements which are
> more proper and valuable at a later stage.  I raised a concern that as
> we start presenting this work more publicly, we should think about
> communicating and setting expectations for the impact of the backwards
> incompatible changes.  I proposed adding an explicit, formalized part
> of the PLIP procedure for community impact assessments.  I'd love a
> better name, but the idea is a place to communicate to the various
> parts of Plone communities (developers, integrators, themers, users,
> etc.), "Here's what you need to know to update your code/skills.
> Here's where to find documentation."  I offered to take the lead on
> this.

One of the hopes I have for this is that many times when a PLIP
contributor goes to say "Here's where to find documentation", they'll
discover it doesn't yet exist and that these discoveries might be a part
of substantially improving Plone documentation.

At any rate, I'd like to open this up for discussion on this thread.

Chime in!
Ross


_______________________________________________
Framework-Team mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.plone.org/mailman/listinfo/framework-team

Reply via email to