rfcs
rfcs copied to clipboard
RFC 0040: Create proposal for a general mappings library/project
Why not just use Mapping IO?
- Mappings IO has a different scope than this proposed project.
- Mappings IO is not in house. I would like something in house. As well, the rfc covers how the projects will still be published separately, but be integrated in one larger project to reduce code duplication.
I don't think not in house is a good excuse to not use something. If it works, we should use it. I can't really give input on that though since I don't know what exactly mappings IO does.
Otherwise, this looks like a good plan to me.
If code is constantly being duplicated between tools I see no reason not to have them as one project instead
Mappings IO is not in house. I would like something in house. As well, the rfc covers how the projects will still be published separately, but be integrated in one larger project to reduce code duplication.
This isn't a good justification for not using something. Has mappings-io been investigated? We don't have to keep merging with upstream on it, but have we considered its strengths and weaknesses, and if it could possibly be used in the building of tiny utils?