Re: [Haskell-cafe] Package documentation complaints -- and a suggestion

On Tue, Oct 25, 2011 at 11:17, Ketil Malde wrote:

Ivan Lazar Miljenovic writes:

...

Right, but first we need to define what all those terms _mean_... and it's no good saying your package is "stable" if you change the API in a large-scale fashion every release.

I think there are better criteria to use, like:

- do exported definition have Haddock comments? - does the package have an automated test suite? - is the package used by other packages? - ...by different authors? - has the package been recently updated?

This is useful information, but to call it "stability" is not only misleading, but it also prevents the package from using that field to indicate whether or not it is stable! --Max