On Jan 3, 2011, at 7:57 PM, Torsten Bergmann wrote:
> I think we can could/should not really force people to it
> but at least work on this and add support for cleaning.
>
> For instance blocking the Monticello upload in 1.3 if a package
> does not follow certain criterias would not be a good
> idea!
>
> We want to continue accepting solutions even if they are not 100%
> (since the definition of 100% sometimes depends on the POV and
> we may end up with code Bureaucracy and maybe less developers).
>
> Pharo should continue to be fun but we want more discipline.
>
> IMHO we should:
>
> 1. do it step by step by more repacking and documenting
> (see the already repackaged announcements and regex,
> Sunit will follow with issue 3445)
>
> => we need cleaned exemplary packages so people
> are able to follow the patterns
yes!!!
> 2. Define lint checks and make them instantly available via
> browser tools. Maybe you know the VisualWorks browser where
> you have the checks in a tab beside the code pane where
> one could instantly check and see problems in code.
>
> Eclipse has that too with Checkstyle/"the Problem view".
>
> I would like to see that in standard browser.
Yes now the standard browser code is bad so.
> 3. Define minimum criterias a core/dev package must have
> to be part of the system (unloadable, cleaned up dependency,
> class comments, have tests, ...)
>
> 4. Give a visual feedback (icon) if the package is not "clean",
> so people get a bad feeling when they see this on their
> packages and work towards cleaning.
>
> We can also have a package ranking ("the most clean" or
> "package of the month", ... ;)
The coolest programmer of the month ;)
>
> Just $0.02
>
> Bye
> T.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> GMX DSL Doppel-Flat ab 19,99 Euro/mtl.! Jetzt mit
> gratis Handy-Flat! http://portal.gmx.net/de/go/dsl
>
