diff --git a/extreview/approved.rst b/extreview/approved.rst new file mode 100644 index 00000000..852374db --- /dev/null +++ b/extreview/approved.rst @@ -0,0 +1,32 @@ +Approved Extensions +=================== + +This document contains a list of all extensions that were approved and the +date of approval as well as notes. This should make it possible to better +track the extension approval process. + + +Flask-Babel +----------- + +First Approval: 2010-07-23 +Last Review: 2010-07-23 +Approved version: 0.6 +Approved license: BSD + +Notes: Developed by the Flask development head + +How to improve: add a better long description to the next release + + +Flask-SQLAlchemy +---------------- + +First Approval: 2010-07-25 +Last Review: 2010-07-25 +Approved version: 0.9 +Approved license: BSD + +Notes: Developed by the Flask development head + +How to improve: add a better long description to the next release diff --git a/extreview/listed.rst b/extreview/listed.rst new file mode 100644 index 00000000..426e6ce4 --- /dev/null +++ b/extreview/listed.rst @@ -0,0 +1,183 @@ +Listed Extensions +================= + +This list contains extensions that passed listing. This means the +extension is on the list of extensions on the website. It does not +contain extensions that are approved. + + +Flask-CouchDB +------------- + +Last-Review: 2010-07-25 +Reviewed version: 0.2 + +Would be fine for approval, but the test suite is not part of the sdist +package (missing entry in MANIFEST.in) and the test suite does not respond +to either "make test" or "python setup.py test". + + +Flask-CouchDBKit +---------------- + +Last-Review: 2010-07-25 +Reviewed Version: 0.2 + +Would be fine for approval, but the test suite is not part of the sdist +package (missing entry in MANIFEST.in) and the test suite does not respond +to either "make test" or "python setup.py test". + + +Flask-Creole +------------ + +Last-Review: 2010-07-25 +Reviewed Version: 0.2 + +Would be fine for approval, but the test suite is not part of the sdist +package (missing entry in MANIFEST.in) and the test suite does not respond +to either "make test" or "python setup.py test". Furthermore the README +file is empty. + + +flask-csrf +---------- + +Last-Review: 2010-07-25 +Reviewed Version: 0.2 + +Will not be approved because this is functionality that should be handled +in the form handling systems which is for Flask-WTF already the case. +Also, this implementation only supports one open tab with forms. + +Name is not following Flask extension naming rules. + +Considered for unlisting. + + +Flask-Genshi +------------ + +Last-Review: 2010-07-25 +Reviewed Version: 0.3 + +Would be fine for approval, but the test suite is not part of the sdist +package (missing entry in MANIFEST.in) and the test suite does not respond +to either "make test" or "python setup.py test". Furthermore the long +description is empty. The zip_safe flag is not set to False which is a +requirement for approved extensions. + + +flask-lesscss +------------- + +Last-Review: 2010-07-25 +Reviewed Version: 0.9.1 + +Broken package description, nonconforming package name, does not follow +standard API rules (init_lesscss instead of lesscss). + +Considered for unlisting, improved version should release as +"Flask-LessCSS" with a conforming API and fixed packages indices, as well +as a testsuite. + + +flask-mail +---------- + +Last-Review: 2010-07-25 +Reviewed Version: 0.3.1 + +Would be fine for approval, but the test suite is not part of the sdist +package (missing entry in MANIFEST.in) and the test suite does not respond +to either "make test" or "python setup.py test". Furthermore the long +description in the package index is a little bit too short. + +Package name should be changed to Flask-Mail with the approval to be +consistent, this might also be the change to improve the API if necessary, +but I don't see any big design problems there. + + +Flask-OAuth +----------- + +Last-Review: 2010-07-25 +Reviewed Version: 0.9 + +Short long description, missing tests. + + +Flask-OpenID +------------ + +Last-Review: 2010-07-25 +Reviewed Version: 1.0.1 + +Short long description, missing tests. + + +Flask-Script +------------ + +Last-Review: 2010-07-25 +Reviewed Version: 0.2 + +Would be fine for approval, but the test suite is not part of the sdist +package (missing entry in MANIFEST.in) and the test suite does not respond +to either "make test" or "python setup.py test". + +The upcoming 0.3 release looks promising, could need a longer "long +description" in the package index though. + + +Flask-Testing +------------- + +Last-Review: 2010-07-25 +Reviewed Version: 0.2 + +Would be fine for approval, but the test suite is not part of the sdist +package (missing entry in MANIFEST.in) and the test suite does not respond +to either "make test" or "python setup.py test". + + +Flask-Themes +------------ + +Last-Review: 2010-07-25 +Reviewed Version: 0.1 + +Would be fine for approval, but the test suite is not part of the sdist +package (missing entry in MANIFEST.in) and the test suite does not respond +to either "make test" or "python setup.py test". + + +Flask-Uploads +------------- + +Last-Review: 2010-07-25 +Reviewed Version: 0.1 + +Would be fine for approval, but the test suite is not part of the sdist +package (missing entry in MANIFEST.in) and the test suite does not respond +to either "make test" or "python setup.py test". + + +Flask-WTF +--------- + +Last-Review: 2010-07-25 +Reviewed Version: 0.2.1 + +Would be fine for approval, but the test suite is not part of the sdist +package (missing entry in MANIFEST.in) and the test suite does not respond +to either "make test" or "python setup.py test". + + +Flask-XML-RPC +------------- + +Last-Review: 2010-07-25 +Reviewed Version: 0.2.1 + +Missing tests, API wise it would be fine for approval. diff --git a/extreview/rejected.rst b/extreview/rejected.rst new file mode 100644 index 00000000..a953f363 --- /dev/null +++ b/extreview/rejected.rst @@ -0,0 +1,55 @@ +Rejected Extensions +=================== + +This is a list of extensions that is currently rejected from listing and +with that also not approved. If an extension ends up here it should +improved to be listed. + + +Flask-Actions +------------- + +Last Review: 2010-07-25 +Reviewed version: 0.2 + +Rejected because of missing description in PyPI, formatting issues with +the documentation (missing headlines, scrollbars etc.) and a general clash +of functionality with the Flask-Script package. Latter should not be a +problem, but the documentation should improve. For listing, the extension +developer should probably discuss the extension on the mailinglist with +others. + +Futhermore it also has an egg registered with an invalid filename. + + +Flask-Jinja2Extender +-------------------- + +Last Review: 2010-07-25 +Reviewed version: 0.1 + +Usecase not obvious, hacky implementation, does not solve a problem that +could not be solved with Flask itself. I suppose it is to aid other +extensions, but that should be discussed on the mailinglist. + + +Flask-Markdown +-------------- + +Last Review: 2010-07-25 +Reviewed version: 0.2 + +Would be great for enlisting but it should follow the API of Flask-Creole. +Besides that, the docstrings are not valid rst (run through rst2html to +see the issue) and it is missing tests. Otherwise fine :) + + +flask-urls +---------- + +Last Review: 2010-07-25 +Reviewed version: 0.9.2 + +Broken PyPI index and non-conforming extension name. Due to the small +featureset this was also delisted from the list. It was there previously +before the approval process was introduced.