Resending to the list, sorry Brent for the duplicate.
---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Braden Shepherdson
Hello,
Most (152/159) modules are marked as unstable in contrib. A good number of these 'unstable' modules have not been modified since a number of releases.
Here's a rough total number of modules with a last-modified date (per year):
(for x in `find .`; do; (darcs changes $x | tail -n 2 | head -n 1); done) > lastmod for x in {2007,2008,2009}; do; grep $x lastmod | wc -l; done 64 43 17
I wouldn't trust those numbers, since the total falls short of 159, but
On Wed, Jul 29, 2009 at 08:10:52PM -0400, Adam Vogt wrote: the
point still stands: many so-called unstable modules have not changed in a long time, which could make it difficult for users to avoid modules that may actually change.
Does anybody mind if I change the oldest modules (unchanged since 1.5 years) to be stable?
Sounds good to me. I think most of the 'unstable' designations are because of cargo-culting someone else's module comments. That and the fact that by definition you would only change the stability designation when you are not changing anything. No one ever thinks "gee, it's been 6 months since I even thought about that module, better go back and change it to 'stable'". =)
-Brent _______________________________________________ xmonad mailing list xmonad@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/xmonad