Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Self reporting tooling schema and processes definition #12
Self reporting tooling schema and processes definition #12
Changes from 10 commits
a1f6e2f
6c0fc78
18f95d1
60bce43
458de58
05e0f03
ea0601a
a6054b3
3815714
0b77004
81922bb
e48621e
c753ae5
dc45af8
40924c4
3c0fae8
3b0f9d7
9c09829
2749e06
a0fa9cf
6299390
5d4f67f
01262e9
2cc9670
5e5ee3a
abdd404
04cba4b
6588385
d1bdb67
6e29bf1
d521696
File filter
Filter by extension
Conversations
Jump to
There are no files selected for viewing
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I'm not saying I'm fully against including this, but in spirit of the above (friction) -- as an implementer I have no idea what this is, and clicking on the link doesn't tell me what I should use in literally less than 3 seconds, which seems like a papercut that again could push someone towards not doing this.
At first glance, it seems cute, but I don't know why it's better than simply a scale of 1 to N on how production ready the software is considered.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I agree.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
It is true that PyPi classifiers are far more used, but I don't see any other package manager file format looking to specify project status. And, I'm not sure it's really talking about project maturity either. If a project is classified as a "toy", you might never use it in production, because the author is signalling they don't intend to really maintain it. It may very well be stable, but it might not be getting security patches.
I'm not expecting maintainers to go look at this schema.
Considering that, what probably makes senes is to provide a template for maintainers to use which is just the minimal, and invite those who have time or are curious to look at the optional fields, such as this one.
I think maturity is actually pretty interesting and something we could consider adding!
Do you know where I can find the definitions of the Development Status classifier levels used by PyPi?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Actually I wasn't even specifically referring to PyPI classifiers when commenting previously. I was assuming that this scale is about project maturity. Though now spending 30 seconds instead of 3 I see it's not about that at all. But given I haven't spent much more than that, I don't really know why it's useful to say something is a
toy
vs saying it isalpha
maturity. To someone encountering the project they presumably should take the same "practical" information out of seeing that. Which again kind of leaves me saying "cute, someone has some simple model of how to classify projects" but not as an implementer "oh god I need to take the time to see what this is so I can fill this out".But! I did not notice it's optional, so if it is, then all the above is irrelevant probably, and indeed people will ignore it if they don't know what it is.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I think maybe just do a read through and see how many "which"'s there are...
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Can you explain this please? It feels like you're assuming it should be obvious why this is bad? Does it make it harder to read or understand?
The primary purpose of the readme is to explain things. It often goes into more detail about things.
I'm open to more specific suggestions if you have them.