Craig
Craig Latta craig.latta@netjam.org wrote:
I think we do have a constructive process.
You rise an important issue. I think this deserves attention.
Serge Stinckwich was suggesting on 17-Feb that we should think about the development process.
Serge Stinckwich Serge.Stinckwich@info.unicaen.fr wrote:
Hi all,
i just found that the Python community use something they called PEP (Python Enhancements Proposals). PEP are design documents describing new feature for Python. There is a workflow that deals whith how the PEPs are manage by the community.
Look at the PEP Purpose and Guidelines : http://www.python.org/peps/pep-0001.html and the index of PEP here : http://www.python.org/peps/
Maybe, we can build something like that for Squeak : Squeak Enhancements Proposals (SEP) ? in order to have a more rigourous development process.
Is it possible for you to do a short write-up of what you think when you speak of a constructive process? Where do you see the pros and cons? How do you think things should change in the future?
A short write-up (bullet list) would already be a great start. If you come to the conclusion that the term 'constructive process' is not well chosen you may change it of course.
Perhaps there is already some material on this - then an update and sending in the pointers to the list is sufficient!
If you could work on this that would be great!
Regards Hannes