On 4/7/22 08:02, Jared Dominguez wrote:
This is a proposal. Nothing has changed yet. The choice is now
whether
to go forward with it or come together with a cohesive
alternative, including one of the two listed in the proposal. But we
need a solution that accounts for the existing maintainers not having
capacity to continue maintaining legacy code. I've seen responses from
I haven't yet seen a clear answer about what code is "rotting" and which
legacy code is too hard to maintain. Is there something actually broken
right now?