On Tue, 2018-09-18 at 09:26 +0200, Bertrand Delacretaz wrote: > Hi, > > On Thu, Sep 13, 2018 at 6:48 PM Daniel Klco <[email protected]> wrote: > > ...One concern I have with the experimental (or perhaps the > > definition > > therein) is that it seems much more bleeding edge than what we > > currently > > consider contrib.... > > I think contrib and experimental refer to different axes. > > There's the code maturity axis: experimental, alpha, beta, product- > ready. > > And the Sling PMC committment axis: > > a) core, for things that we consider an integral part of sling and > intend to maintain continuously, being careful about backwards > compatibility etc. > b) contrib, for modules which might not be maintained continuously > and > might be out of sync with the core modules > c) whiteboard, for modules which we aren't sure belong in Sling yet > > Although it's rare to have an "experimental & core" module, "contrib > & > production-ready" is realistic, even though such a module might not > be > usable with the latest core due to its contrib status. Orthogonal > concerns, really. > > I think we should label modules on both of these axes, without mixing > them up.
Maybe 'unsupported' is a more expressive term than 'contrib'? (Although it might be scarier) Robert
