Maurits Rijk wrote:

> I just had a look at the code of some of the plug-ins and I noticed that
> there is often lot's of room for improvement:


> <snipped...>
> So my question: is it worth the effort to carefully go through all the
> code (not only plug-ins) and clean things up?

Worth relates to whether a plug-in is worthy. Surely, the effort of a generally
worthy plug-in deserves all the maintenance it can get. That is the idea 
behind the PLUGIN_MAINTAINERS file which Sven Neumann inaugurated on 4 January, 2000.
Quite frankly, plug-ins compete for mindshare. Worthy plug-ins accrue individuals
willing to maintain them. Maintainers shake out as much of the cruftiness that
their time and talent allows and balance the advantages and disadvantages that
Mr. Rijk advanced.

The beauty of this is plain: the worthiness of a particular plug-in is not based
on my humble opinion, nor yours, no anybody else's. It is simply based on the
fact that it has accrued a maintainer, someone who cares enough about it to 
fight code rot.

Now in the 240 days or so since PLUGIN_MAINTAINERS has been in the CVS tree,
about fifty-five plugins appear to have garnered maintainers,
out of a population of 165 or so. Of the two-thirds without regular
maintainers, quite a few are like cacti, requiring little water and even less
soil, they continue functioning with only occasional maintenance from bug fixers.
Others are -- well, you can inspect the bug reports as well as I and correlate
the unmaintained titles with outstanding reports. If, in the event that something
like a 1.2 Official Release should crowd close upon us, and a motion is made
to reduce the size of the distribution, I would claim that an unmaintained 
plug-in with outstanding bug reports is an ideal candidate to oust from the 
package. There would be unbiased and quantifiable reasons to do so.

My two U. S. cents.

Garry Osgood

Reply via email to