On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 7:23 AM, Simen Kjaeraas <[email protected]> wrote: > On Sun, 18 Jan 2009 23:11:15 +0100, Stewart Gordon <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> As long as that automatically pruned list isn't the default. Otherwise, >> there would probably be lots of new projects started when it would be better >> to revive an existing project. > > Then have the list divided into two parts: on the top, the active projects, > on the bottom (and explicitly marked as such), projects that have not been > updated in a while. > Simen >
Sounds reasonable to me. --bb
