My expectation is that the repository will be updated incrementally as the group progresses, so outside observers will be able to see roughly the current WIP at all times.
This is fine in general but I think it would save much effort to you and other participants if we first agreed on what exactly we are building before actually starting the work. This requires that the technical requirements are put forth and agreed upon. Can you please briefly describe what are you trying to achieve before publishing any definitions? Otherwise, we are risking facing two negative consequences:
-
Psychological anchoring might make the group reluctant to accept competitive design goals once an implementation proposal is already in place.
-
The discussion may become less organized as core goals will be discussed alongside minute technicalities of the implementation.
Case in point: you are implicitly proposing here that the ease of manual configuration be a critical design goal. Let’s make such proposals explicit.
This thread is not intended to be the place for technical discussions, it is a meta-discussion. You and @dagar appear to be interested in this specific technical matter, so let us discuss it separately. EDIT: see Port type safety enforcement