[ckan-dev] CREPs - important proposal!
David Raznick
kindly at gmail.com
Fri May 6 10:17:00 UTC 2011
+1 for Cep. Actually I think they should be call "Sebs" ...
How about this: we could suggest that as a first step, people fire off
> an email to ckan-dev with a one paragraph of their idea, and see if
> the consensus is that they should write up a CEP for it? This would
> cover you and Will's concerns quite nicely. The guideline would then
> be that *every* idea should start with an email of any length at all
> to ckan-dev; and CEPs should only be written if requested (or the
> proposer thinks it's needed anyway)?
>
I agree with this. I think the cases they need to be written is when.
* Changes to external apis.
* A controversial change not really agreed on by a small mail to dev.
* A large change that will step on a lot of peoples toes.
* An idea that seems good but the author does not know the field or just
wants some feedback.
* At the authors whim.
* As a form of documentation that will not fit into any other place.
Sometimes the best documentation is found in python peps as it gives you
background in the problem domain.
I am quite happy for their to be a few c(r)eps that just exist that are just
descriptions of the current CKAN and we can put the legacy ceps into that
category.
All in all I am happy, and will probably be good discipline.
David
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.okfn.org/pipermail/ckan-dev/attachments/20110506/7f7f50a5/attachment-0001.html>
More information about the ckan-dev
mailing list