Agreed - will update the site
Siegfried Goeschl
On 11/21/10 11:36 AM, Scott Eade wrote:
On 21/11/10 12:21 AM, Siegfried Goeschl wrote:
I think I'm guilty for that - I updated the site and put everything
which does not look being released in the near future into the
"retired" section
We should probably take such "decisions" a little more carefully.
"Retirement" should probably require some kind of vote, the passing of
which would effectively be an acknowledgement by al of us that the
component is no longer going to be maintained.
Now "Inactive" is another story. If nobody has been maintaining a
component for a while it should certainly be moving them under some
kind of inactive heading. An objection to this would effectively be a
commitment to maintain the component.
Such a classification would have avoided Ludwig's confusion.
Scott
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
