Re: More nuclear options
От | Robert Treat |
---|---|
Тема | Re: More nuclear options |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 200607111317.18289.xzilla@users.sourceforge.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: More nuclear options (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: More nuclear options
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tuesday 11 July 2006 12:55, Josh Berkus wrote: > Robert, > > > To be honest I don't know why people are against throwing the code on > > pgfoundry with a hefty readme saying that the code is unmaintained and > > what it's build status is on various versions > > ... because we don't want to litter pgFoundry with dead, broken projects > which nobody uses and which confuse users and crowd the namespace. > Quality > quantity. > Given the current number of projects that have no code / files / anything associated with them on pgfoundry/gborg right now, this argument rings a little hollow. > In a year nobody has spoken up for those specific projects. Who's > going to maintain them? Who's going to use them? > People do get pointed at adddepends even today... certainly no one will do anything with these projects if you nuke them, but I like giving people options... your call though. -- Robert Treat Build A Brighter LAMP :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: