On Sunday 08 January 2006 01:35, Stuart Herbert wrote: > I agree that some cleaning is needed (and some of my packages are > desperate for it!), but I'm totally opposed to this idea. I think the > idea of shutting up shop for three months (presumably with a "closed > for refurbishment" sign on the door) would let down our users who rely > on us for regular package updates, and would be a massive PR disaster. > Cleaning is something that has to happen all the time; it needs to be > a natural and sustainable part of what we do every day.
As Donnie already pointed out, I did not mean version bumps, but only new packages. How about this idea: Everyone who adds a new package, has to check and fix an unmaintained package before. This should be a non-issue for seasoned developers, but would slowdown those, who continually add new packages without caring for what they should maintain as well as those who become new devs, add a bunch of packages and hide again, leaving the maintenance to others. This would also have the benefit of continuous QA of unmaintained stuff. Regarding PR: The quality of parts of the tree is more than enough bad PR. > If you feel so strongly about this, why not setup a "cleaning crew" > project that goes around doing exactly this? Don't you think that it is pretty much barefaced to let a small group do the dirty, boring and annoying work, while those who don't care a bit can continue to do so?! Carsten
pgp5SDO90yfHE.pgp
Description: PGP signature
