Hoi,
There is a difference between rejecting existing projects on the incubator
because they are stale and our consideration for eligibility. I do not mind
having projects removed from Incubator. It has never been a real
consideration of the language committee what happens there.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 23 January 2018 at 11:01, Oliver Stegen <oliver_stegen(a)sil.org> wrote:
Hm, I'm not so sure about that. If "once a
language is eligible it remains
that way" holds, why do we need proposals at all? We might just as well
create incubator space for every language with a ISO 639-3 code. While it
is my vision that we will, one day, have wikis in every language, I don't
think cluttering the incubator with projects which remain inactive for
years is helpful. So I keep my support of Steve's proposal to mark projects
as "reject as stale" if they were proposed by a once person without
subsequent action.
Fwiw,
Oliver
On 23-Jan-18 08:55, Gerard Meijssen wrote:
Hoi,
Introducing these codes is no problem. It has been agreed that once a
language is deemed eligible it remains that way. When a new team comes
along it may be good to check the standard again to see if something has
changed.
Thanks,
GerardM
On 22 January 2018 at 21:45, Oliver Stegen <oliver_stegen(a)sil.org> wrote:
+1
I concur with Steve's proposal / line of argument concerning "reject as
stale" vs "pending / on hold".
On 22-Jan-18 18:05, Steven White wrote:
Mostly, it has to do with the action date. I don't think it makes WMF or
LangCom look very good to have dozens of projects that appear to have been
pending for over five years, especially when the requester is someone who
showed up for a day, or a couple of weeks, and then has disappeared. I
think it's much better to make sure the requests that are pending are
current ones.
My intention, once I get to requests that are no more than a couple of
years old, is to allow projects to remain "on hold" for 1–2 years, and only
after that closing them. I'm figuring that if no one shows up in two years,
we ought to move on.
Finally, I do intend to make clear on such pages that a future request
would be welcomed if a community (re-)appears in the future.
_______________________________________________
Langcom mailing list
Langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>
Virus-free.
www.avg.com
<http://www.avg.com/email-signature?utm_medium=email&utm_source=link&utm_campaign=sig-email&utm_content=emailclient>
<#m_2226521034812243509_DAB4FAD8-2DD7-40BB-A1B8-4E2AA1F9FDF2>
_______________________________________________
Langcom mailing
listLangcom@lists.wikimedia.orghttps://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom
_______________________________________________
Langcom mailing list
Langcom(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/langcom