On 27 January 2011 07:55, John Arbash Meinel <[email protected]> wrote: > I think it is good to at least make it clear when a LEP is > abandoned/out-of-date. (This could be deleting it, renaming it to an > 'old' state, marking 'this is now obsolete' at the top.)
Having a list of things that are at least mostly Done is also quite nice. > The rest is bookkeeping that has some value, but also some cost. If > people don't do it consistently, then you can't trust that any given LEP > is up to date. Are people really going to be referring to an old LEP to > figure out what to do next? Or are they just going to be submitting a > new one. Agree. I think doing it proactively may not be worthwhile. If something is pushing you to do more work in a particular area it's fairly easy to find the previous LEPs and winnow out of them whatever was both good and not done yet. I think of LEPs as being primarily documentation of a particular step we want to make, as opposed to a complete up-to-date list of the requirements and constraints on the system at the present time. -- Martin _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
