Dividing packages by release schedule is not a great idea. Many
packages don't fall neatly into release schedule categories. A normally
"slow" release package may have many releases as it builds to a new major
version or experiences rapid bug fixes cause by a major overhaul, or a
normally "speedy" released packaged may languish while the maintainer
takes a vacation (or moves into a new house).
Sure, there are lots of packages that aren't very actively
maintained anymore. However, rarely is the case when the author posts a
nice message saying "I'm not going to update very much anymore", more
often you get ghost pages with the last post a year ago saying "The new
version will be out pretty soon, just got a few more bugs and finishing up
exams, don't worry though".
Basically I only see this as making life more difficult by having
packages jump between different groups when their releasing patterns
change and having criterions to decide when a package has officially
changed from fast to slow. This makes both hassle for maintainers and
users.
Chris Pimlott
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
