Skip to content

"Awesome" quality standard #96

Open
@avivace

Description

@avivace

Context: The list started as a collection of "awesome" resources and ended up in being a raw list of everything related to Game Boy (Development) in general. The idea is to thin the main list a bit, moving the WIP, incomplete, not documented and generally not providing a real contribution entries to another page, called MORE.md.

I think that they need to reach a certain "quality standard":

  • Be in a minimal working state
  • Have a clear purpose and/or provide something different
  • Have a minimal documentation/README providing at least a brief overview of the project

How do you think we should discriminate the resources? What makes a resource "awesome"? What is a perfect example of an "awesome" resource and what is not?

Metadata

Metadata

Labels

metaChanges on the structure list, general meta discussions

Type

No type

Projects

No projects

Milestone

No milestone

Relationships

None yet

Development

No branches or pull requests

Issue actions