On Mon, 2007-08-01 at 15:00 -0500, Tim Lesher wrote:
On 1/7/07, Jeff Hinrichs - DM&T <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Perhaps a change in philosophy going forward will assist in keeping
> the documentation complete. Documentation is not something that is
> done after code has been accepted it should be considered a part of
> the code just like the BSD's do, missing or incomplete documentation
> is considered a bug.
That wouldn't be a change in philosophy. That would be more like
"sticking to what we have already claimed the project philosophy is".
>From http://www.turbogears.org/about/philosophy.html
"If it isn't documented, it doesn't exist is a good rule of thumb.
This is not to say that patches will not be accepted without
documentation: send the patches in, by all means! If the feature is
good and valuable, someone will document it. However, until the
feature is documented, it will not be listed as a feature of
TurboGears."
I'm not sure the above works though. I think a more realistic way to
stick it with it would be to say "if it's not documented it doesn't go
in the release branch of the code, full stop". Saying that it just
doesn't get mentioned as a feature leads to more confusion and
fragility, with unmentioned and undocumented code creeping in.
Iain
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups
"TurboGears" 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/turbogears?hl=en
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
