Jim Jagielski wrote:
William A. Rowe, Jr. wrote:
I don't mind rolling dice that the code is 'good enough' if it gets the
votes here on list. Seriously, no objections. But it's too damned easy
to get +1 "ya, that's a cool new module, but I doubt it works, so throw
it in experimental." Code that, anywhere else in the ASF, would never
get the votes for release. And -that- is why experimental must die :)
I agree with your point that experimental has the potential of
being abused, and to end up as a dumping ground for modules and
code that aren't up to snuff, but "we" still want out there.
So for us to have an experimental classification, we need to
do some due-diligence and not be afraid to say "this has
been experimental too long; we either fix/promote it, or we
drop it."
Ack, but we've agreed what shipped in 2.2.0 stays in 2.2.x - which is
why I'd rather see us add 'finished' modules to 2.2.12, for example,
as opposed to having a completely orphaned module in 2.2.24 still
creating noise.
Bill
