Neil Herber (nospam) wrote: > On 2007-05-01 kjettil is rumoured to have said: >> I'd propose that, similarly, the Cookbook recipes be organized in two >> sets: 1 - One set for recipes which have been tested and proved to be >> stable, reliable and secure, and therefore can be recommended for >> safe use by serious web site developers. 2 - One set for recipes >> under development and testing, and which may be released to the first >> set, when further testing has shown their stability, reliability and >> security. Discussions on this set should take place in pmwiki-devel. > > I don't think this division is a realistic proposal, given the nature > of Cookbook recipes. Writing recipes is not a simple task, and writing > secure and stable ones is even more difficult. At second thought, you may be right; it would require a review committee, or something of that sort, to judge whether a recipe qualifies. The problem remains, though, unsolved. > I also assume that for any recipe I use, the author has done the best > job they could to make it secure and stable (unless they explicity > label it as a beta of some sort). Whether I have confidence in that > assessment depends (for me) on how well the author's other > contributions have stood the test of time. My assessment of ZAP is now clear - thanks to the contributions over the last 36 hours! But normally, it's a time consuming process to find out which ones are in the rough.
/kjettil _______________________________________________ pmwiki-users mailing list [email protected] http://www.pmichaud.com/mailman/listinfo/pmwiki-users
