On Sep 18, 2009, at 11:53 AM, Tres Seaver wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
This is from a note I sent yesterday to the ZTK steering group (Martijn, Christian, Jim, Stephan), proposing criteria for removing packages from the ZTK. Martijn has already updated the docs to reflect some of the criteria: I figured I would throw the rest out for discussion:
- - If a ZTK package isn't used by at least Zope2 and Grok, it probably isn't getting the love needed to stay at an appropriate quality level to meet the ZTK goals. Given that the Zope2 developers have as an explicit goal removing dependencies on *any* zope.app.* package, I obviously believe that such packages should not be part of the ZTK.
- - Any package which doesn't have real narrative documentation checked into its 'docs' subdirectory, or a commitment from a maintainer to create such docs, should be on probation.
- - Any package which depends on a zope.* package which is *not* part of the ZTK should itself be removed from the ZTK.
- - As a corollary, any package which depends on any other "probationary" package is automatically probationary itself.
- - (A little more speculative) Any package which doesn't have one or more clearly-identified maintainers should be probationary.
- - Packages which remain in the probationary status for a given period (three months? six?) should be removed from the ZTK.
The overall goal here is to keep the ZTK as coherent as possible, and avoid "bitrot" by focusing on the packages which are in active use by more than one project.
Sounds interesting. Do you happen to have a list of packages that would be affected by these rules? Gary