On Feb 13, 2007, at 10:08 PM, Thomas Aylott (subtleGradient) wrote:
On Feb 13, 2007, at 4:56 PM, Allan Odgaard wrote:
# Status
The status of the bundle should probably be something like stable /
unstable. Not entirely sure, especially since we do not branch
development and release bundles.
unstable
stable
broken
abandoned
crappy (aka. needs updating or something)
Might be useful to orient this toward user contributions:
'abandoned' (does not have an active maintainer, needs more work/has
bitrot)
'experimental' (has active maintainer, needs more work, maintainer has
immediate plans to rework things)
'needs help' (has active maintainer, needs more work to be generally
useful)
'happy' (has active maintainer, probably feature complete, additional
tweakage welcome)
'happy' -- 'usable' is probably a better choice. Might be a little
pejorative one way or the other, though. I think if you have 'stable',
you also need 'unstable-but-useful'. But I don't think there exists
any bundle that I'd consider 'stable,' for various reasons. Ruby
probably comes closest. But my standard for 'stable' may be
unreasonably high.
Chris
_______________________________________________
textmate-dev mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.macromates.com/mailman/listinfo/textmate-dev
