Re: Repo: should we take it up?

I'm of the opinion that the sooner we can get developers using these 
things the sooner we can fail fast, hard, and early and then iterate to 
refine our specifications and implementations. So yes, let's get a repo 
going and see how that experiment goes. I'm tired of 
waterfall-design-by-committee, it's not the most efficient way to get at 
the best answer.

- Angelina

On 2013-06-29 12:54 PM, Brian Kardell wrote:
>
> This has been discussed in a lot of contexts, but I'd like to propose 
> that maybe we are far enough a long that we should: a) decide if we 
> want to take this up as a group b) if so, what exactly should it's 
> goals be.
>
> My own personal view is that we should, and here are my thoughts about 
> goals.
>
> minimally:
>
> - provide a repo, under prollyfill.org <http://prollyfill.org> maybe
> - give devs an easy way to submit and a place to discover them
>
> Ideally though, i think it has a lot of potential uses we have 
> discussed on the list too.
>
> It could provide metadata that tracks useful information from both the 
> dev point of view and implementer/standards body points of view.
>
> It could create a sort of simple, more grassroots/public, shadow 
> process toward standardization of "slang".  By defining some hurdles 
> and milestones it would be possible for developers to see something 
> like a caniuse and manage their risk tolerance based on how far along 
> something is.  Simple things like whether it has been peer reviewed, 
> whether it has tests, whether (and how many) members of a relevant 
> working group endorse the proposal, how many people "like" it, etc 
> would help.  We would have to discuss details, but this might be a way 
> to reduce the noise enough to allow standards folks to follow things 
> that reach a certain level.  It might also collect information about 
> whether it is a plugin for a framework vs something standalone. This 
> could be useful because it gives a sense at how useful the framework 
> is, what sorts of use-cases it enables, etc.
>
> Likewise, since this group is vendor neutral, we might be able to 
> think about how to set up things (at least those that meet certain 
> criteria) as a trusted source CDN and see if vendors can give it some 
> special treatments - yoav's special-cache thing, for example.
>
> Others?  This is intended to start a discussion more than be a very 
> specific proposal.
>
> Brian
>