On Fri, 20 Jan 2012 17:15:57 -0600
Chris Adams <cmadams(a)hiwaay.net> wrote:
Once upon a time, Kevin Fenzi <kevin(a)scrye.com> said:
> b) unretirement
>
> This could be pretty massive changes. If something was retired years
> ago, the entire spec could be very different. Or it could have been
> yesterday. But making the time variable for re-review makes it much
> more complex. Last time we looked at this, it was an easy way to
> tell if something needed re-review. Is it orphaned? then just take
> it. Is it retired? then re-review it.
I would think that making it release based rather than time based
should be okay. If there have been N released shipped without
package foo, then foo needs to be re-reviewed (with N being only 1 or
2).
Possibly, but that info isn't super easy to find. You would need to
look at the scm-commits list to see when it was retired.
kevin