It's been considered. I've never really got the reasons for it though. Who determines whether the stable version is the default or not? I don't like it being sysops, and if is 'sighters'/whatever, then what would that really accomplish? If the issue is that is would get outdated, then people shouldn't review things no one will follow up on enough.
It also requires another table just to store whether to make the stable version the default. Plus, it makes the interface more complicated and what version is the default seems more random and confusing to readers.
Also, please use wikiquality-l@lists.wikimedia.org for stable versions stuff ;)
-Aaron Schulz
From: Jimmy Wales jwales@wikia.com To: jschulz_4587@msn.com Subject: stable versions... a few thoughts Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 21:50:49 -0400
I think it is absolutely (absolutely!) imperative that stable versions has to be enabled and disabled per-page, like protection or semi-protection. If it is not, then there is just absolutely no way it will ever go on English Wikipedia - and not likely anywhere else either.
Is that contemplated? Can we make sure it does that?
_________________________________________________________________ Now you can see troubleĀ before he arrives http://newlivehotmail.com/?ocid=TXT_TAGHM_migration_HM_viral_protection_0507