On Tue, 19 Sep 2000, Adam Turoff wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2000 at 08:33:18AM -0700, Dave Storrs wrote:
> >
> > OPEN ITEMS:
> > Note: Not all of these have RFCs associated with them. I would simply
> > like to form a list consensus of how we want to address them.
> >
> > 1) Pod parsers:
>
> I think I missed this discussion. Can you provide the relevant URLs
> on mail-archive.com, please?
It starts at:
http://www.mail-archive.com/perl-qa%40perl.org/msg00157.html
and goes for about 10 messages.
> And I'm not sure this is an issue for perl-qa to resolve. POD Shall
> Not Change[*] from a markup perspective. Whether the tools
> change/improve/multiply is not an issue for the Perl6 project to
> resolve, it's an issue for tool writers to fight^Wargue
> over^W^Wdiscuss.
I wasn't suggesting that we should change anything, or even
resolve any of the issues about which model is better. I just wanted to
make sure that, (A) if anyone wanted to submit an RFC related to this,
that it went in in time, and (B) if either Marek or Barry wanted any help
or input, it was made available to them.
> > 3) Indexing documentation
> > As far as I can tell from skimming the RFC archive, we never
> > submitted an RFC on the idea of putting indexing hints into your POD. Do
> > we want to do this?
>
> Is this a QA issue, or a documentation issue? There is going to be
> plenty of time to discuss documentation, and all of those issues seem
> orthogonal to actually developing Perl6. That is to say, there may be
> QA related issues to this, but they don't need to be resolved now.
I'm not sure I understand exactly what your concern is, could you
please clarify it for me? Are you claiming that, since Pod is not
something that core perl deals with (except to ignore it when
appropriate), we (the people discussing the development of perl6) should
not be discussing it at this time? Or are you claiming that POD is not a
QA issue and should not be discussed on this list? Or is it something
else entirely?
I personally feel that the indexing hints are a good idea; I'd
like us to come up with the best possible mechanism for implementing them,
and then submit an RFC on the topic (or maybe submit the RFC and then
wrangle it). However, the discussion did somewhat die out...if that was
because people decided that it's not worth it, then I won't bother
submitting an RFC.
Dave
