develooper Front page | perl.cpan.workers | Postings from May 2015

Re: Documenting best practices and the state of ToolChain guidelinesusing CPAN and POD

Thread Previous | Thread Next
From:
Peter Rabbitson
Date:
May 6, 2015 08:48
Subject:
Re: Documenting best practices and the state of ToolChain guidelinesusing CPAN and POD
Message ID:
5549D53C.5000204@cpan.org
On 05/06/2015 10:44 AM, Philippe Bruhat (BooK) wrote:
> On Wed, May 06, 2015 at 09:26:03AM +0200, Peter Rabbitson wrote:
>> Therefore I am urging you to think broader and go for:
>>
>> Policy - short blurb what is this about
>>    Policy::Org - short sub-blurb what is this about
>>      Policy::Org::P5P - pumpkin maitaned
>>      Policy::Org::Toolchain - joint maintainership
>>    Policy::Project
>>      Policy::Project::Moose
>>      Policy::Project::DBIC
>>    Policy::Author
>>      Policy::Author::AUTARCH - explicitly reserved (and non-squatable, PAUSE
>> admins take action when needed)
>>      Policy::Author::RIBASUSHI
>>
> Just thinking that the "Org" intermediate bit is not really needed
> (and ugly). The said organizations are big/important enough that they
> naturally float above the "Project" level.

The only reason I included ::Org because it leaves the door open to 
"small, unimportantorganizations" before they become (potentially) 
big/important. This is just to explain my thinking, I am not married to 
the idea of ::Org::

> Would documents like David's CONTRIBUTING.mkdn document that he includes in
> most of his distributions fit under Policy::Author::DAGOLDEN?
That's the thing - does the distzilla cabal have a desire to unite 
behind a set of best practices? Then it belongs under ::Org::Dzil::...


Thread Previous | Thread Next


nntp.perl.org: Perl Programming lists via nntp and http.
Comments to Ask Bjørn Hansen at ask@perl.org | Group listing | About