Bertrand Delacretaz wrote:
Le Mardi, 23 sep 2003, à 14:26 Europe/Zurich, Nicola Ken Barozzi a écrit :...And maybe also use a low-tech way of adding a WARNING_BETA_BLOCK.txt or WARNING_SCRATCHPAD_BLOCK.txt file in the block source dir to make it clear to CVS browsers and coders of the status of the code.Or rather an XML block description file?
The upcoming block descriptor could include meta-information relating to the block's "stamping" status.
The problem I see with having only a descriptor is that one hat to open the file to see the status, and few will do, as the current situation shows.
That's why a file with a descriptive name can initially alert users better...
Why not, I see your point.
But I also think blocks "quality descriptors" need to move beyond just "marked alpha", to more precise descriptions of how mature/usable/certified a block is.
This info should also be used by the block deployer for warnings when installing non-certified, alpha or unstable blocks.
-Bertrand
