Caroline, to be consistent..
Should 4.a Description and 4.b Maturity Level be moved to 3.x INCLUDE: CVS summary (and get the info from the .info page)?
Using the same data source would help reducing the burden of updating multiple locations.
Should 4.e and 4.f be moved to 1.x (where plans and issues are posted in bugtracker) to encourage reporting everything in one place (for tracking purposes etc)?
Could the 1.x Bugtracker Summary include counts of bug severity and enhancements (feature requests)?
Could there be another INCLUDE: Code Metrics 5.x with:
a. count of tcl procs
b. count of package-key/tcl lines
c. count of package-key/tcl/test tests
d. count of pg/oracle/shared db functions
e. count of package-key/sql lines (pg/oracle/shared)
f. count of package-key/www/*.adp pages (or all adp pages in the package)
g. count of package-key/lib file pairs
see: https://openacs.org/storage/view/proposals/packages-report.html
for rough example.
The code metrics would help developers quickly realize the level of development and completeness of the code. For example, packages with a low count for tests and lib areas would indicate lacking in meeting newer OpenACS standards, whereas a high count of db functions would indicate an extra burden in maintaining 2 sets of code.
Code metrics might also be useful to others who want to contribute to rounding out a package's weaker points, or make estimates about the burden of maintaining a package etc.
