On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 4:35 PM, Mike McGrath <mmcgrath@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > In general from the infrastructure side I'd say we want to keep the > barrier to enter low but the quality high. Certainly there's projects > that don't need to be updated every 6 months but we can identify those and > deal accordingly. How about 'delisting' instead of deleting? I'm operating under the assumption that the infrastructure burden of hosting the project isn't the problem you're trying to solve, and that keeping the projects at fedora hosted relevant is. A delisted project simply wouldn't appear on the main fedora hosted list of projects, but would still be available via direct link. That way, nothing is lost, but the clutter vanishes. You could even have yet another category for projects that are known to be abandoned. -RN -- Robin Norwood "The Sage does nothing, yet nothing remains undone." -Lao Tzu, Te Tao Ching _______________________________________________ Fedora-infrastructure-list mailing list Fedora-infrastructure-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-infrastructure-list
