[Haskell-cafe] Re: Haskell web development entries on the Wiki
michael at snoyman.com
Sun Oct 3 06:10:27 EDT 2010
On Sun, Oct 3, 2010 at 11:59 AM, Christopher Done
<chrisdone at googlemail.com> wrote:
> On 3 October 2010 06:51, Michael Snoyman <michael at snoyman.com> wrote:
>>>> * Does pass.net still exist anywhere? Same for parallel web.
>>> I couldn't find any references to pass.net.
> I meant that I remember adding it, but I couldn't find any references
> for it. I.e. it's dead. Maybe we can split that page by
> active/inactive too.
>> I would recommend *not* qualifying the active/recommended stuff. Maybe
>> "Frameworks" and "Frameworks/Inactive". I personally wouldn't want to
>> group new, unevaluated code with inactive: I think we should give the
>> new players the same publicity as the established products on the main
>> page, but perhaps with a little label explaining how new/untested it
> Trouble is most on the Web/Frameworks page are still /available/ but
> it's hard to see if they're "active" i.e. people are still using them,
> or whether they're still build-able. Perhaps it would be best to
> create the Frameworks/Inactive page and then at the top of the
> Frameworks page say "Inactive frameworks are listed here." and then
> when someone is definitely sure something is defunct they can move it.
> Or what do we do?
I would actually do the opposite: we can put the libraries/frameworks
that we are sure *are* active into the Active section and put
everything else into Inactive. I have a feeling we'll be pretty close
on the mark with our guesses; a quick look at the last upload date on
Hackage should be sufficient. People are *much* more likely to move
stuff from Inactive to Active than the other way around.
We can also send out an email to the cafe/web-devel with a list of
packages we plan to mark as inactive and see if anyone objects. If no
one is willing to stand up for a package, odds are it's dead.
More information about the Haskell-Cafe