Rosetta Code:Village Pump/Old draft tasks: Difference between revisions
Content added Content deleted
(Thoughts) |
(Cull some ?) |
||
| Line 10: | Line 10: | ||
:If the problem is that a task is too complicated or large, that doesn't mean the task isn't poor. Generally, in these cases, the original author might be asked to provide a few more examples in different languages. That's likely to provide enough differentiation in examples to cause some folks around here to question the task's description. |
:If the problem is that a task is too complicated or large, that doesn't mean the task isn't poor. Generally, in these cases, the original author might be asked to provide a few more examples in different languages. That's likely to provide enough differentiation in examples to cause some folks around here to question the task's description. |
||
:Otherwise, perhaps simply creating something like {{tmpl|WillNotImplement}} which takes a parameter as to some reason "why" might be enough to get some tasks out of the doldrums. I see no reason a draft should be archived or set fully aside without some discussion or attempt to get it up to snuff, first. --[[User:Short Circuit|Michael Mol]] 19:35, 11 May 2011 (UTC) |
:Otherwise, perhaps simply creating something like {{tmpl|WillNotImplement}} which takes a parameter as to some reason "why" might be enough to get some tasks out of the doldrums. I see no reason a draft should be archived or set fully aside without some discussion or attempt to get it up to snuff, first. --[[User:Short Circuit|Michael Mol]] 19:35, 11 May 2011 (UTC) |
||
:I think that someone who starts a task off should only do so with the intent of providing one good implementation in a short order of time. Mainly because the disciplin of providing both, would raise such a task, even if it remains draft, above the level of a task with no agreed, good, implementation. Without that first good implementation and task description , the task has very little to differentiate itself from some entry on the Suggest a programming task page, and should, in fact be somehow deleted and replaced by an entry there if the task page is abandoned without gaining those twin things of: |
|||
:# An improving/good enough description. |
|||
:# One correct implementation. |
|||
:By adopting the above, would we then have a sizeable problem of tasks with one good implementation and a good task description but no further activity for some time? Not sure :-)<br> --[[User:Paddy3118|Paddy3118]] 21:51, 11 May 2011 (UTC) |
|||