[development] Module developers, please do *proper* releases !
mistknight at gmail.com
Mon Feb 18 14:49:20 UTC 2008
I'm sure that a developer with a module ready will not back away once he
sees you require him to simply use a proper release rather than a dev
release. I mean to think this would make the entry level higher seems a
little of an over statement.
Why does naming your releases suddenly make it a commitment to users or
anything major and against open source? It's ready when it's ready, and it's
ready when it's released. Try to line up some clear arguments against
enforcing proper releases. Garbage code can be in a dev or in a release, at
least garbage in a release can tell us which release to avoid.
Enforcing releases is neither cruel to developers, doesn't hurt the open
source spirit, doesn't dictate any new requirements on developers as even
current releases have no restrictions whatsoever.
What do releases do? They make update module work better, they make user's
lives easier cause they don't have to wonder which "dev" release they're
using without going to check on file dates and so forth, they make things
less chaotic. Releases don't mean a developer is guaranteeing anything or
losing any flexibility. I see nothing bad in enforcing them at all.
On Feb 18, 2008 4:39 PM, Earnie Boyd <earnie at users.sourceforge.net> wrote:
> Quoting Ivan Sergio Borgonovo <mail at webthatworks.it>:
> > I think it is in the right of drupal infrastructure team to impose
> > minimum requirement so that your module is hosted and advertised on
> > drupal infrastructure and associated with drupal project.
> Nope. Drupal and therefore its contributed modules uses the GPL
> license which guarantees that I can do what ever with it including
> hosting it else where.
> > drupal project is free to impose or not impose any rule.
> Not if the rule violates the license.
> > They do... and you'll have less developed modules.
> > They don't... and the the quality of modules will be lower.
> > All this reflects on the image and technical merits of drupal project
> > as a whole.
> Maybe. Or perhaps it would less favorless on the project if Drupal
> decided not to host contributed modules at all. There is a learning
> curve and there are suggested procedures with the contributed module
> conventions. Enforcing them is a community effort and if you find a
> module that doesn't align with the suggested procedures you can open an
> issue with the project.
> > It doesn't look scandalous.
> Yes it does because what you propose violates the license.
> Earnie -- http://for-my-kids.com/
> -- http://give-me-an-offer.com/
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the development