> 1) Do we put them all in the parrot CVS tree I think it would be good for the languages to be in tree, but I would like to have it under a different mechanism for cvs checkout. In other words, the default cvs checkout of parrot does NOT check out the languages tree, but a separate checkout is required for the languages.
> 2) Do we require them to meet the same levels of quality as the core > interpreter? At some point they should need to meet same criteria as the parrot. Right now, I think the priority is parrot and should remain such. I think the language implementations are just an experiment, and should not be held to the same criteria (that should be stated somewhere). However, at some predetermined point, some resources should be redirected to testing and refining all of the subtrees (including docs). Grant M.
