dsource considered harmful

[Bill Baxter]

On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 3:56 AM, dsimcha <dsimcha at yahoo.com> wrote:
> == Quote from Martin Carney (marcarn at hotmail.com)'s article
>> Visiting dsource I'm disappointed by the large number of half-finished and
> not-started projects on the projects page.
>> I pick on interesting project and look at the source tree - no files or years
> out of date.
>> I think the unfinished, out-of-date and not-started projects should be moved to
> their own page - lets see the wood for the trees...
>> mc
>
> Or, an even simpler idea:  Since these things are difficult to define and require
> human intervention, sort each project category by last checkin.  The most active
> projects will be on the top, and the least active on the bottom.

Getting a different ordering every time you look at the projects list
would be annoying.  But you could make an automatically  pruned list
that just omits any project that hasn't had an update in 6mos or so.
The good thing is that DMD keeps changing so much that if a project
hasn't been updated in that long, it probably doesn't compile.   So
the argument "it's not dead, just stable!" doesn't hold.

Anyway I think Brad was working on this at one point.  There were a
bunch of ideas thrown around at least.

My vote would be to get something simple up like you suggest.  Keep
the full list somewhere, but put a prominent link at the top pointing
to another page that just lists the projects with activity in the last
6 months.  Likewise on the "active" list put a link to the full list.

--bb