[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [Repo-criteria-discuss] Hello experts!
|
From: |
Juuso Lapinlampi |
|
Subject: |
Re: [Repo-criteria-discuss] Hello experts! |
|
Date: |
Wed, 11 May 2016 19:52:48 +0000 |
|
User-agent: |
Mutt/1.5.24 (2015-08-30) |
On Wed, May 11, 2016 at 09:14:11PM +0200, Hein-Pieter van Braam wrote:
> Currently NAB is not listed on the evaluation page, but perhaps it
> could/should be? Since the whole point of NAB is/was to provide
> developers with a free platform I'm very much interested in doing well
> on such an evaluation.
There is an ongoing discussion if any and every Git repository service
someone is willing to review should be listed.[1] I am personally as a
by-stander reader with one evaluation thinking notability should matter.
I use NotABug too, but I don't think it's really notable if you apply
Wikipedia's notability guidelines on it. Versus GitLab, for instance.
Last month Andrew Ferguson evaluated NAB and it received an F grade.[2]
I set a proposal to list at least those that reach the B or A criteria
or better.[3]
[1]:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/repo-criteria-discuss/2016-05/msg00006.html
[2]:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/repo-criteria-discuss/2016-04/msg00057.html
[3]:
https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/repo-criteria-discuss/2016-05/msg00007.html