On 2/7/06, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Specifically with respect to Latka, but applicable to all Commons components. <snip/>
Thanks for bringing this up, its been something I (and possibly others) have been wondering as well. Add EL to that starting list. > > How do we want to handle released (ie non-sandboxed) components that > have gone dormant? Do we add a new component called Legacy (or > something like that)? > <snap/> Ofcourse we do. As Robert points out there may be separate "legacy" and "matured beyond belief" categories (even though the second category has extremely limited membership, IMO), but the undercurrent still holds -- some components are not supported as well as we'd hope (I just browsed the archives for unanswered questions, and bugzilla for unanswered tickets). > So: > > Released > Legacy > Unreleased <snip/> IMO, Sandbox has too much "history" (going back to our charter) to change its name ATM (not sure if you were implying that, probably not). > Dormant > > Currently we have 6 months as the time to drop out of the unreleased > (sandbox) section and into the dormant section. How long would we want > to be looking at to start a vote to drop things from Released into > Legacy? 1 year? 2 years? > <snap/> It'd be fine to err on the conservative side for components in proper (released), I believe 1 year is conservative enough. Ofcourse, this has to do with more than svn check ins (email traffic & the general "feel" as mvdb puts it) but I believe all this is doable (with votes) and should be done. We have adequate standards for sandbox components in place now, IMO, its time we followed up on a similar note with the released components as well. -Rahul > Hen > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
