Re: Game announcements on LGDC

[Paul Tiseo <ptiseo@mediaone.net>]

At 11:21 PM 6/2/99 +0200, you wrote:
>Voila.  The idea of barring code is not unanymously cheered upon,
>and nobody has come forward to take the responsibility of being the
>one to judge what's cool and what's not.

	I can think of two obvious solutions:

	- Review: Have a "panel" of three to five people quickly look over the
source and get a surface evaluation. Then, we could use it solely to steer
newbies away from poorly documented code. I just don't think we should be
setting ourselves up for offending anyone. In this case, it's not really
worth it. Otherwise, we'd better be prepared to take a serious approach to
reviewing source code and not doing a half-assed job at it. That would mean
some dedication by a few people of differing views on what source should
look like to reach a common consensus.

	- Caveat Coder: (I doubt there is a latin word for "coder".) Or, we should
simply leave it up to the reader. No warning, no evaluations. Maybe we
could go as far as listing interesting routines implemented in the code and
let the reader go to the sources he/she can or wants to use.

	Source should definitely not be barred from being advertised on LGDC.

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Paul Tiseo
ptiseo@mediaone.net