Hi,
I see some problem with the maintenance of the styleguide as a project:
- The project contains no README, LICENSE, CONTRIBUTING or CHANGELOG file (the
project homepage contains that information instead, of course, but that's not
how to do open-source, forks should have this information)
- The project homepage does not link to this issue tracker
- The homepage does not mention a maintainer, it is not clear at all who will
respond to issues, and who may decide about style changes.
- some HTML sources have xml file ending
- Eclipse/IntelliJ settings files in the repo are not linked from the homepage
or any of the guides
- The styleguides follow different conventions (xsl vs. css for styling,
different versioning schemes (last changed vs revision number))
- cpplint.py would benefit from being hosted independently on github or similar
(I forked to my personal github repo at https://github.com/tkruse/cpplint)
- Maintenance of the guides would be more convenient if the HTML/XML sources
were written in a markdown dialect or reStructured text instead of xml.
Possibly presenting via readthedocs would yield beautiful yet cheap results
- The Common LISP Guide contains General guidelines regarding any project, not
just LISP
- code examples have no syntax highlighting
- all language specific guides would do well to include further configuration
for the various existing static checker tools, such as checkstyle for Java or
pep8 for python etc. This would work better if there were more of a folder
structure.
In other words, the styleguide itself as an open-source project does not set a
great example for how google should present open-source projects, IMO.
Compare the effort that goes into this project with the effort that went into
material design guide:
http://www.google.com/design/spec/material-design/introduction.html
Making the styleguide itself a model open-source project would easily be
feasible as Summer of Code project or similar.
Original issue reported on code.google.com by
[email protected]on 6 Jan 2015 at 5:59