On Mon, Oct 04, 2010 at 02:35:43PM -0700, Donald Bruce Stewart wrote:
igloo:
As a general process point, surely we should just work out what API changes we think should be made, and if the maintainer/developers can't make them in time for the next HP release then the package can go into the following one?
Or: we put it in, and the next major rev includes those changes.
If there are many changes, then I don't see the advantage of putting it in before they are made. We would be telling people to write code against the old API, and then breaking their code 6 months later. If there are few changes, and the developers still don't have time to fix them, that would suggest the package doesn't meet the spirit of the "All packages in the platform must have a maintainer" requirement. Note also that accepting the package as-is removes some of the motivation for the developers to make the changes.
Until all of the HP is at the same high level, we may need to make some tradefoffs to move faster.
I think the bar should be higher for new packages, or it will get harder and harder to raise the standard as the platform grows. Thanks Ian