<snip>
Anyway, it kinda seems like people like this concept provided that it
doesn't impede the important task of development. I would hope that we
could actually *add* value to the project, but I guess that will
largely depend on how things get implemented. I got to thinking that
github might be an easy way to accomplish what we want without too
much overhead. We could have a repository of essays (maybe all in
wikitext format, say) that folks can clone, add to, and submit pull
requests to. Pull requests will be accepted only when the essays seem
like they are up to snuff, and the issue tracker could be used for
moderating.
Thoughts?
or you could just use the current documentation structure.
As documentation is a requirement (along with tests) for any feature, it
seems starting by writing the documentation of a feature (presumably in
a fork on a branch) would make a decent pep-like vehicle to gather
feedback.
Then when a feature is accepted, the design defense, documentation and
implementation can be merged as a single history.
-w
--
>>>
Whit Morriss
CodeMonkey
[email protected]
--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"pylons-discuss" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected].
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected].
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/pylons-discuss?hl=en.
