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