On Tuesday, September 4, 2018 8:37:16 PM MDT Dylan Graham via Digitalmars-d wrote: > On Wednesday, 5 September 2018 at 02:10:27 UTC, Jonathan M Davis > > wrote: > > [...] > > Sure, yeah, but if you're using a package that hasn't been > maintained in 2-3 years you need to take whether it will work > with a grain of salt anyway.
Definitely, but plenty of folks seem to eroneously assume that everything on code.dlang.org works, and unless you're actively thinking about the possibility that something there is unmaintained, you're probably not going to notice that it hasn't been updated in years. And sadly, even if a package was updated a few months ago, it could still be broken. So, the date that it was last updated isn't always a good measure of whether it works, though the older the date is, the more likely it is that the package is broken. I don't actually think that this is a huge issue, but I do think that past discussions on the topic have made it fairly clear that we need to improve code.dlang.org with regards to making it clearer which packages are actively maintained and generally considered to be solid vs those which are unmaintained and/or in an alpha state. Stuff like the package's rating and how old the most recent version is definitely help, but more could (and arguably should) be done. However, as with many things around here, even if we agree that something should be done, that doesn't mean that it's actually going to get done soon - especially if it's something that's more likely to cause pain to newcomers than longtime users. - Jonathan M Davis
