I would like to ask that package maintainers (or where they checked stuff in but didn't maintain it, those people) make sure that packages they submit contain some minimal documentation.
*yet another rant requesting more docs below* Here's some pointers wrt 'bare minimum': - a README.txt inside the package root directory containing a one-paragraph summary of the package, including intended usage, rough package stability (ie pre-alpha, alpha, beta, stable) and relationship to other packages where applicable - a src/xdocs/index.xml file containing at least the same summary - a simple example of basic use of the package of some kind (getting started docs, source code example, etc) - API documentation, at a minimum a package.html file in the package root Where you find it too cumbersome to write/maintain this level of documentation, please include a README.txt stating the package is pre-alpha and not fit for use. There's *a lot* of subsubsubsubprojects atm, and I'm sure that when it gets confusing for committers it is a hell for (potential) users. While I'm okay with lots of subsubsubsubprojects, I feel that they are 90% worthless to the community if it is not clear at a glance what they do. I've said it before (like Paul has), but I think I'll keep saying it till things are fixed... thanks, Leo -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]> For additional commands, e-mail: <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
