Code/Doc quality is a must indeed, but I refuse to be part of some biased
unclear scoring system that threatens to remove my packages I'm doing so in my
free time _NOT PAID_ because of unclear process.
code_quality - (Optional) An integer evaluation of code quality between 1
(low) to 4 (highly mature code).
doc_quality - (Optional) An integer evaluation of documentation quality
between 1 (no documentation) to 4 (professional documentation).
project_quality - (Optional) An integer evaluation of project maturity from
1 (Abandonned project) to 4 (Living project with community).
Run
Well, Let's check how well did @Araq and @dom96 do to follow their lead. many
of their packages code/doc/project quality (2-3) and there're ones even. How
would you expect people to create quality projects even if the core
contributors score 1,2,3 they don't have a 4 in your scoring system ? Even the
official nim-lang account has only 2 projects with 4 :D
Let me be clear, that would be fine if it's a project wanting to be part of
stdlib then you can have your committee or whatever do rating process and
whatnot, but threatening people to remove their packages from nimble index
isn't wise. Actually it might be a better idea that we officially ask people to
use full github url from now on and boycott the whole thing now.
If you want to make people's lives easier just show how many packages depending
on the package you intend to use to give them confidence.
Some question for you who controls that sheet? who's opinions are considered?
on what bases?how frequent that changes? do you open issues on the repos you
find not up to your standards to clearly state what are the problems? or does
that happen on PR against nimble?
