[Starting thread with new subject] On 21 June 2015 at 16:03, Hervé BOUTEMY <herve.bout...@free.fr> wrote: > Le dimanche 21 juin 2015 15:54:29 jan i a écrit : >> On 21 June 2015 at 15:48, Daniel Gruno <humbed...@apache.org> wrote: >> > I think the site is ready for a more prominent role, but I find this >> > discussion confusing, and I find it somewhat sad that we're gonna stick >> > with something as arcane as DOAP. >> >> +100 !! >> >> DOAP == Dead On Arrival Permanently :-) JSON == Jump Simply On New >> (but I know I am only 1 voice). > step by step, please: this will avoid confusion between independant topics > > switching without disturbing current conventions/knowledge is something that > already takes a long time and energy: I know it because I put a lot of energy > on it for a few monthes now! > > We started a discussion on this source format topic during april, and AFAIK > nobody worked on it. > > What I'd like now is to switch: we can discuss later on what we want to change > (and communication to every comittees this requires). > With the new site, we'll be able to change formats if we want, the only > requirement is to have json files for the visualization
Some PMCs are very responsive to requests to maintain DOAP files; others take months and multiple reminders even for a simple fix. This does not directly affect the format used to hold the data. However it does mean that changing to a new format is likely to take a lot of time and involve a lot of work. Meanwhile the code will need to continue to support the old format. It would however be an opportunity to make some improvements. For example: - we could be more specific about the data that really needs to be maintained by PMCs - we could require that the files are stored in a well-known place, rather than requiring an index file to find them.
