On Wed, Mar 13, 2013 at 10:19:01AM -0400, brian d foy wrote: > 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.
It would help substantially because 'adoptable' would be front and centre on the relevant search pages - I see a lot of times that people don't really find out about there being an adoption process without being told and this allows us to flag that as being 'in progress' without needing any extra infrastructure. > > But if others were willing to do the work or we could recruit some > > others, I'd be in favor of such a change. > > 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. I believe that Brendan's plans should already result in the creation of a group of people who'd send the requests to this list. If we decide that the policy side is appropriate, I'm happy enough being the mechanism (i.e. the one who goes and kicks the PAUSE interface); I'm sure I can find us a couple more volunteers who people wouldn't be too scared of having as PAUSE admins if the workload gets too much for me. -- Matt S Trout - Shadowcat Systems - Perl consulting with a commit bit and a clue http://shadowcat.co.uk/blog/matt-s-trout/ http://twitter.com/shadowcat_mst/ Email me now on mst (at) shadowcat.co.uk and let's chat about how our Catalyst commercial support, training and consultancy packages could help your team.
