Hey Darrell, Is this not partially available already with the rating system? Just a thought.
Darren On 17/08/2008, Darrell Shandrow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello GW Staff and others, > > I'd like to propose a simple peer review type scheme for SC. Since > everything remains in beta at this time, problematic scripts going to users > is not currently an issue for anyone who has correctly set expectations. > Once Window-Eyes 7.0 is released in its final form, however, users are going > to be expecting a certain level of assurance that scripts on SC won't cause > significant problems. I guess it's all about Debbie Hazelton's EEEEEE > word... :-) > > Anyhow... :-) > > Script Classification > > I propose scripts be classified into three distinct categories on SC > whenever new scripts are added or someone publishes an update to their > existing script: > > 1. Beta - These scripts are available only to those on the Window-Eyes > private beta team. > 2. Prerelease - These scripts are intended for public consumption, but await > peer review before being made public. > 3. Release - These scripts have been approved for use by the public. > > Procedure > > Whenever a new script is added to SC, or an update is uploaded to an > existing package, it is first diverted to a small group of volunteer script > testers. These testers download and try out the new or updated script. If > they find it works after a reasonable amount of preliminary testing, the > tester could select an option that would change the script's status from > prerelease to release, thus approving it for public consumption. This could > be done on the approval of just one tester who has downloaded and tried the > script. The point is not to create a complex, bureaucratic scheme out of SC. > It is only to ensure that any scripts someone might download have a > reasonable level of assurance of working without causing any sort of > catestrophic impact on their Window-Eyes installation. > > These ideas aren't at all intended to be offensive to the hard work put in > by several developers of scripts. It is important, however, especially after > WE 7 gets released, that the quality of scripts do not negatively impact the > impression of the product in the blind community and the assistive > technology industry at large. A basic peer review system for SC would go a > long way toward helping to ensure nothing awful happens... :-) > > All the best, > > Darrell Shandrow - Accessibility Evangelist > Information should be accessible to us without need of translation by > another person. > Blind Access Journal blog and podcast: http://www.blindaccessjournal.com
