cocoon-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Crossley <>
Subject RE: on better release and version management
Date Wed, 01 Oct 2003 13:09:08 GMT
Reinhard Poetz wrote:
> Stefano Mazzocchi
> > Berin Loritsch wrote:
> > 
> > > I would highly recommend steering away from the use of
> > > the word certified
> > > unless you intend to establish a standards body to oversee 
> > > an official certification process.
> > 
> > Good point. "Supported" sounds less marketing intrusive.
> > 
> > comments?
> What happens if we find out that a certain block is not supported any
> more (technology outdated, we have a better block, any active
> developers) *after* we marked it as supported. The first question I had
> was "how long does supported mean"? The former proposed *certified*
> relates to a certain point of time without saying something about the
> future. 
> Another point is that Cocoon is open source and nobody can be forced to
> support a single line of code ...
> Maybe we can find a word that relates to a point of time and does not
> have all the meanings "certified" has (see Berin's mail
> Reinhard

How about "verified" ... together with a verification-date and
expected-review-date and the other metadata.

We would verify that it has an active community, verify that it
plays nicely with the rest of the Cocoon, verify its cvs commit-rate
(or verify that it is so stable that it does not need a high rate),
verify other stuff ... while KISS.

With this word we stop short of saying that we certify or support.


View raw message