Re: Documenting best practices and the state of ToolChain guidelines using CPAN and POD

On 05/06/2015 08:03 AM, Kent Fredric wrote:
> This is something that has bothered me for a while.
>
> We have a lot of standards and guiding principles, but a lot of it is 
> all in our heads, wisdom one can only get by talking about it on 
> toolchain, and/or breaking things and getting yelled at.
>
> ...
>
> As such, I propose a very rudimentary idea:
>
> Toolchain
>
> This is the top namespace
>
> Toolchain::Standards
>

First of all +1000 on the idea itself. I want to point out an 
alternative to the naming, simply because I have been thinking about 
something *very* similar for about 6 months now (and this email may in 
fact be the thing that gets me rolling).

The toolchain is not the only thing that has a body of knowledge to be 
documented. All organizations have that. All individual projects have 
that. And *individual authors* have things they would want to document. 
Not because of vanity, but because it is much much much simpler to link 
to a piece of text, instead of rehashing an argument for the 100th time.

Therefore I am urging you to think broader and go for:

Policy - short blurb what is this about
   Policy::Org - short sub-blurb what is this about
     Policy::Org::P5P - pumpkin maitaned
     Policy::Org::Toolchain - joint maintainership
   Policy::Project
     Policy::Project::Moose
     Policy::Project::DBIC
   Policy::Author
     Policy::Author::AUTARCH - explicitly reserved (and non-squatable, 
PAUSE admins take action when needed)
     Policy::Author::RIBASUSHI

Sorry for the sidetrack