On Wed, Dec 14, 2005 at 11:51:29PM -0600, Cody Koeninger wrote: > On 12/14/05, Michael J Forster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'm talking about one site (mirrors > > aside) with consistent layout and navigation, one agreed upon set of > > standards for documentation and testing, and one ASDF-INSTALL > > compatible repository. > > Can I get a HELL YEAH? > Documentation-wise, the only contenders I'm aware of are Albert and > CLDOC; I can try to put together a comparison. > Testing-wise, there are scads of libraries; anyone interested in > furthering the comparisons linked from > http://www.cliki.net/Test%20Framework ? > Or did you actually mean 'standards', rather than 'standard implementations'?
I meant 'standards' as in a policy, a set of conventions, principles, prescriptions, and proscriptions. Like the GNU coding standards, Debian policies, or FreeBSD port maintainer guide, such standards could recommend or require specific tools and implementations. However, at this point, my inclination is to think about and discuss the value and scope of the standards rather than any specific rules. Please understand, bureaucracy is not my goal. The consistency, clarity, and completeness of Edi Weitz's library pages [1], as an example, are. Of course, we don't have to wait to have a policy in hand before investing some time and effort in reviewing the available tools. -Mike [1] http://weitz.de/cl-ppcre/ -- Michael J. Forster Shared Logic Inc. _______________________________________________ Gardeners mailing list [email protected] http://www.lispniks.com/mailman/listinfo/gardeners
