> > > 1. Does the submitted code fill a need for users of the SDK? > Could the code better exist as an optional component? Ask yourself does it > need to be part of the SDK at all? > > Looks great, Justin. My only feedback would be (and its purely cosmetic) that #1 become the last step in the list. Whether a component gets put in the "holy" component project, a "bonus" components project or some ala carte component area - if it meets the other criteria and someone is committed to maintaining it, I think there is value in having it somewhere in the source tree. If the tiered approach is taken, I would also say they should try and use the same package structure.
- SDK Inclusion Process (was re: [OT] What are we doing here?... Omar Gonzalez
- Re: SDK Inclusion Process (was re: [OT] What are we do... Justin Mclean
- Re: SDK Inclusion Process (was re: [OT] What are w... Daniel Reicher
- Re: SDK Inclusion Process (was re: [OT] What a... Justin Mclean
- Re: SDK Inclusion Process (was re: [OT] Wh... JP Bader
- Re: SDK Inclusion Process (was re: [O... Justin Mclean
- Re: SDK Inclusion Process (was re: [OT] What are w... Omar Gonzalez
- Re: SDK Inclusion Process (was re: [OT] What are we do... Alex Harui
- Re: SDK Inclusion Process (was re: [OT] What are w... Justin Mclean
- Re: SDK Inclusion Process (was re: [OT] What a... Carol Frampton
- Re: SDK Inclusion Process (was re: [OT] What a... Alex Harui
- Re: SDK Inclusion Process (was re: [OT] Wh... Omar Gonzalez
- Re: SDK Inclusion Process (was re: [O... Alex Harui