[RFC] Extensions Meta-Data File

[brunoais]

^
For now: +1.
Seems like it's complete to pass to other ones to check if there are things missing

[naderman]

I think that "Current" prefixes to a string author type are superfluous. I'm fine with adding previous or former, if you want to indicate they did not actually author anything in the current version, but that just seems odd. It's an author tag, not a maintainer tag. So it doesn't mean that someone is currently maintaining the package, but that they were an author at the time the package was published like that. And even if someone no longer contributes they remain an author unless all their contributions have actually been deleted. So I'd prefer that we do not mandate and prefixing like that for author types.

Also please don't post specifications as PDFs. This is a web project. Post them on the wiki if you like or here in BBCode, but not as PDFs.

[MichaelC]

I think that "Current" prefixes to a string author type are superfluous. I'm fine with adding previous or former, if you want to indicate they did not actually author anything in the current version, but that just seems odd. It's an author tag, not a maintainer tag. So it doesn't mean that someone is currently maintaining the package, but that they were an author at the time the package was published like that. And even if someone no longer contributes they remain an author unless all their contributions have actually been deleted. So I'd prefer that we do not mandate and prefixing like that for author types.

Also please don't post specifications as PDFs. This is a web project. Post them on the wiki if you like or here in BBCode, but not as PDFs.

I copied it just from how its done in MODX.

And I posted it as PDF because the MODX 1 Spec was done as a PDF. And formatting that was hard enough in MS Word, it would be near on impossible to do and do it neatly in BBcode or wiki.

[igorw]

People still write official RFCs in text format and it works just fine. It doesn't need to be shiny, it needs to be understandable, readable and editable.

[tumba25]

Don't MOD ppl need to specify the minimum PHP version for their MOD to work? Say... Need php 5.3 caused by a function needed that exists only in php5.3?
"php-version": "5.3.*",

Only if the MOD requires a newer php version than phpBB.

[tumba25]

As I said on IRC please use a free file format, to make sure everybody can read and edit the specs.

I think Author => type should be renamed to position.

Current and previous makes sence if the position is maintainer, translator, tester or something like that, but then the dates also should be there. And if there is a ending date it obviously is previous.

[MichaelC]

As I said on IRC please use a free file format, to make sure everybody can read and edit the specs.

I think Author => type should be renamed to position.

Current and previous makes sence if the position is maintainer, translator, tester or something like that, but then the dates also should be there. And if there is a ending date it obviously is previous.

Format: Yep.

Rename: Nils mentioned that briefly on IRC but didn't have any strong preferences.

Current & Prevous: Its since been changed (I forgot to edit the spec attachment in the first post) and now its free-form as per a request from Nils. So they can put the position but the prefix current/previous is not required but previous may be added.

Dates: As for dates, personally I think thats kind of overkill but if you really think its needed I'll add it.

[tumba25]

Rename: Nils mentioned that briefly on IRC but didn't have any strong preferences.

I preffer position. Type feels definetly wrong, IMO.

Dates: As for dates, personally I think thats kind of overkill but if you really think its needed I'll add it.

No, date needed. If prevous and current where used, then I think we also need dates, but not without them.

[MichaelC]

Ok, I'll be changing that then.

I've updated the spec in the first post, added a schema, updated the example and added 2 more examples.

Feel free to criticise and point out and differences between the schema and the spec (or even where the examples do something wrong).

I've created a repo with it all in to make updating it all easier instead of using lots of gists but the repo isn't a proper one, just a way of keeping track of changes and letting me update stuff easily.

[imkingdavid]

Actually, I think "Role" would be better than permission(edit: position). Or "Status". But whatever you guys decide I guess is fine.