On Thu, 10 Aug 2000, [iso-8859-1] Aleksi Niemel? wrote:
> 
> Conrad asks: 
> > Any idea why more or most of these things aren't in RAA? Impedance
> > mismatch? Lack of encouragement? Excessive humility? 

Explanation of how to submit things is lacking on the page
http://www.ruby-lang.org/en/raa.html
so this might be a bigger factor.  I have looked around and cannot
see what the mechanism is for submissions.

> 
> I dare (yet again) to cross the line and suggest something:
> 
> - "What's new" is good, but inadequate. 
> 
> We need "complete history list", and release history (dates are important)
> for each distributed entry.

A description for each thing would help as well.  If the package name
is a link to the description, this is not clear from reading the page.
> 
> - We need stricter categorization. 
> 
> Mainly the categorization between half baked idea, snippet or example,
> usable or useful snippet, real application and supporting library should be
> made very clear. Most of the time I'm interested in libraries and examples.

Could be useful.  I think it would be useful to have a contents block
on raa.html, so one can see and jump to the appropriate category, without
scrolling all the way through.


> - We need testing and supporting community.

Testing needs to be done, how this is done is another matter. 
Should there be peer review for submissions to the archive?
Should the author(s) provide evidence of testing?

> 
> > Maybe we should also rename RAA to (say) ERA (Extended Ruby Archive
> 

I think this sounds too much like extensions to ruby.

> 	- Aleksi
> 
	Hugh
	hgs / dmu.ac.uk