> > All back-ordered gold stars should also now have been awarded. > > You might look at old ITA messages, too. I'm sorta owed some for > adopting orphaned packages. I don't know that I really deserve them, > since I don't release new versions very often, but maybe others who > actually do put a lot of time into their packages are missing stars.
OK, I'll look back at ITAs as I have time. Igor's last update was in Dec. 2007 so I'd only have to look back that far. In general I look to CV and CGF for gold star requests. Adopting an orphaned package should generally be good for one, but if there's a judgment involved about how active someone is being at maintaining a package they adopted... that's starting to turn into a research project for me. Maintaining HTML file filled with archaic tags and constructions: OK, no problem. Researching people's package maintenance histories: no, thanks. > Also, I don't see why stars expire. Long service shouldn't be discounted. Yeah, good point. I agree, we should take that part out, if there are no objections. -- Problem reports: http://cygwin.com/problems.html FAQ: http://cygwin.com/faq/ Documentation: http://cygwin.com/docs.html Unsubscribe info: http://cygwin.com/ml/#unsubscribe-simple
