On 2 October 2010 22:13, Michael Snoyman
I understand the advantages to splitting into multiple pages, but on the other hand it *does* make it more difficult to locate information.
It does? What's an example? I'll fix it.
My guess is a good search function on the wiki will make that point moot.
Probably!
* Does pass.net still exist anywhere? Same for parallel web.
I couldn't find any references to pass.net.
* Should older, unmaintained stuff (Wash, for example) be removed entirely, placed on its own page or be obviously marked as unmaintained?
Yes, I think so. There are a lot of frameworks on that page that are
just cluttering it up, most of them are unmaintained or don't really
have a big user-base. Perhaps we should split it to Active /
Recommended and Inactive / Unevaluated or something like that. If I
was looking for web frameworks I'd want to know which ones were
actively maintained and then *maybe* what other ones there are. It
could well be two pages. Frameworks/Active or Recommended_Frameworks
and then the other. I'm not sure. Thoughts, chaps?
On 2 October 2010 22:24, Gwern Branwen
* Should we rename HAppS to Happstack everywhere?
I think we should. No one is using the old HAppS code, so references are just misleading.
Agreed.