On Tuesday, 8 de February de 2011 08:19:46 Andre Somers wrote: > I think this is very important, though you should be able to start such > a workflow even before you have actual code. This way, you can discuss > whether an idea for a piece of code would fit into Qt, before you start > investing a lot of time actually writing it or working it up to Qt > standards, documenting it, etc. I think it would be beneficiary if the > review if a certain functionality belongs in Qt would be possible, and > the relevant maintainer is "on board" on that, before you start > investing a lot of time on it. Of course, the actual code will still > have to meet all the requirements, but the discussion on whether this > belongs in Qt or not could be finished. This can save a lot of > disappointments for would-be contributors, I think.
Hello Andre
Isn't this just mailing list discussions? The existence of a mailing list not
in the list of requirements since it's outside the scope of the tool, but
there will be mailing list(s).
--
Thiago Macieira - thiago (AT) macieira.info - thiago (AT) kde.org
Senior Product Manager - Nokia, Qt Development Frameworks
PGP/GPG: 0x6EF45358; fingerprint:
E067 918B B660 DBD1 105C 966C 33F5 F005 6EF4 5358
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Opengov mailing list Opengov@qt-labs.org http://lists.qt-labs.org/listinfo/opengov
