Joshua McKenty wrote:
I'm a fan of c), where the officialness is tied to a committed
organization or team that is keeping the code up-to-date and tested. I'd
also be a fan of making that a per-release designation, with an easy
renewal if the commitment is still in place.
Generally, a
I'd definitely go for option c here. I'm one of those Core Developers you
mention that wants less code in the core repos. We also need to make sure the
right people are maintaining that API code, which aren't necessarily the *-core
teams.
On May 2, 2012, at 1:02 PM, Vishvananda Ishaya wrote:
On 05/03/2012 04:08 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Joshua McKenty wrote:
I'm a fan of c), where the officialness is tied to a committed
organization or team that is keeping the code up-to-date and tested. I'd
also be a fan of making that a per-release designation, with an easy
renewal if the
+1, primarily by process of elimination. The other options seem either too
permissive or too strict. I think our job is to provide a way for the
ecosystem to develop and give people a place and category for these projects to
live, but not to micromanage every piece of the ecosystem.
Devin
On May 3, 2012, at 1:16 PM, Jay Pipes wrote:
The term recommended comes with a lot of baggage :) I don't want plugins to
be recommended or suggested -- at least by the community; companies should
feel free to recommend or suggest whatever they feel is best for their distro
or deployment.
You have been subscribed to a public bug:
As discussed in bug 920757, the check-ins for all projects are gated
using CLA sign. It's not necessary to enforce an entry in AUTHORS file.
The file should be auto-generated when we package using python setup.py
sdist command. The .mailmap file, if
6 matches
Mail list logo
