Re: Requiring DOAP instead of MAINTAINERS file

Am Freitag, den 18.01.2008, 11:02 +0100 schrieb Vincent Untz:
> Le vendredi 18 janvier 2008, à 10:52 +0100, Mathias Hasselmann a écrit :
> > > Does this sound like a good plan?
> > 
> > Sounds like a bad plan, 'cause DOAP looks like horrible bloat to me.
> > No chance that I'd support such a file. Would move to another SVN
> > server, before I'd even consider touching this crap.
> > 
> > MAINTAINERS is good: It has a clear purpose and a simple format.
> > 
> > DOAP just is bloated file format with no real purpose, well and guess
> > that's the reason for DOAP not taking off.
> Mathias, can you elaborate on why this would be a problem for you? I
> mean, the files would be automatically created and mostly automatically
> updated, according to Olav's plan.
> While MAINTAINERS is good, there would be more data usable for more
> things (Olav already gave some examples). So just saying "no, it looks
> like horrible bloat" is not really convincing.

If the file you shall maintain looks like a large binary blob, and the
file Olav linked looked like that, this is a valid argument. I
absolutely do not want to edit unreadable, nearly binary looking XML

Mathias Hasselmann <mathias hasselmann gmx de>

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: Dies ist ein digital signierter Nachrichtenteil

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]