So we’ve heard a lot of interest in an updated validator, and I’m going to try to accelerate the process from here.
I’m glad to hear @devin likes @MikeThacker’s proposal, and also I want to get more input from a broader swath of the community as to desired features and related design objectives.
One thing that might help me is updating this proposal to include a set of user stories that are specifically formatted in the standard way – so that we can clearly state our assumptions about who wants to do what. i.e. “As a [database administrator] I want to [take this action] in order to [receive this benefit].” Perhaps mike can help us articulate the user stories that are implicitly assumed by this proposal – and then we can do some polling to get input on which of them are the highest priority, and whether any important stories are missing.
We have some other big questions – such as whether this validator tool should be deployable code or a hosted service, and what language it should be developed in – but perhaps we’ll be better able to have those conversations by first more clearly articulating our assumptions about what the users need.
Thoughts?