In article <caoeq1c-bbxjq4-naui+egrjsceaxcmnuunz0ryh-c6uo2r7...@mail.gmail.com>, David Golden <x...@xdg.me> wrote:
> I think it "improves the universe" by letting the community flag > abandon-ware in a consistent, centralized way (because it winds up > mirrored in 06perms). I don't think that actually improves the situation. How is this different than a person judging on his own based on author activity and release dates, which they can already see? I don't see any additional benefit and a lot more work. I'd rather see someone build a formula that can handle it without any work from PAUSE or a new group of volunteers. This could be completely external to everything that already exists, and I bet it would work just as well. > Imagine if metacpan used it to flag modules as > unmaintained in search results. I don't think that's a trivial > benefit. This is a separate argument though that begs the question that we can do it appropriately. > But if others were willing to do the work or we could recruit some > others, I'd be in favor of such a change. We know how that turns out. Hardly anyone uses the facilities, such as CPAN Ratings, already out there. But this is the problem of being in favor of things that you don't want enough to work on yourself because you think it might benefit some group of people you don't know. -- brian d foy (one of many PAUSE admins), http://pause.perl.org PAUSE instructions: http://pause.perl.org/pause/query?ACTION=pause_04about Archives: http://www.xray.mpe.mpg.de/mailing-lists/modules Please send all messages back to modules@perl.org with no CC to me.
