On Sat, 31 Jul 2010, Tobias Schlitt wrote: > I think that such a process is a good idea. Providing full requirements > and design documentation up front is not always possible and indeed > represents a quite high barrier for new contributions.
However, providing the idea and what you're trying to solve is a good thing to have. This is exactly what the requirements document was supposed to be. Design is of course different. I don't think we should give up the "requirements" part. > We already have the experimental/ area in SVN, where such components > may be developed. > > However, we need to define some requirements on how new component ideas > might enter this experimental area, in order to avoid lots of dead code > there. We can always delete it :-) Derick -- http://derickrethans.nl | http://xdebug.org Like Xdebug? Consider a donation: http://xdebug.org/donate.php twitter: @derickr and @xdebug
