On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 1:58 PM, Ted Kremenek via swift-evolution < swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote:
> > > On Nov 8, 2017, at 11:40 AM, Ted Kremenek via swift-evolution < > swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > > > > On Nov 8, 2017, at 4:30 AM, Wallacy via swift-evolution < > swift-evolution@swift.org> wrote: > > I do not agree with Ted that only a few projects should be ranked, > everyone, as it is in npm should be available. Only be graded according to > recommendations. > > > I’m a bit confused. I’m not sure what comments of mine I’m referring to. > > > Clearly I’m double confused. That meant to read “I’m not sure what > comments of mine *you* are referring to”. > > I fully support having a broad spectrum of libraries that the community > builds and uses. Any library that we decide to make part of “core Swift” — > IMHO at a mature point in a library’s evolution — would need to have high > value to the majority of the community and would need to feel solid enough > that we can lock it in for both source and binary compatibility, high > quality of implementation with sustained maintenance, etc. > i mean I don’t think these approaches are incompatible. The “swift core” could just make the process of independent libraries getting started easier. Like right now there’s really no place to say “hey I just started a library project for X, and anyone who wants to be involved should contribute at Y github repo where it lives right now”. I’ve tried sending that on this list before and it didn’t really work because mailing lists aren’t really a good medium for that and no one wants the swift-evolution list getting clogged with project-specific messages most people don’t care about.
_______________________________________________ swift-evolution mailing list swift-evolution@swift.org https://lists.swift.org/mailman/listinfo/swift-evolution