On Wed, 2007-01-03 at 13:49 +0900, pat eyler wrote:
> > But I really, really don't like to pull a project out from under an
> > admin, even if the project is popular and that admin seems to have
> > disappeared.
> 
> Respectfully, I disagree.  I think there should be a policy describing
> how a project can be changed given an unresponsive admin.  Forks
> should be caused by a difference in opinion about how the project
> is running or the direction it's going.
> 
> If a popular project stalls for a long period of time and the maintainer
> is no longer available, forking it just leads to confusion for everyone
> involved.  How many people will continue to point at log4r even though
> it's not progressing, just because it looks more official than log4r2.

Hm.  I hear ya.  Maybe I've got the wrong end of the stick on this one.
I'll chat with the RubyCentral guys (Rich/David/Chad) and see what they
think.  RubyForge is owned by RubyCentral (they pay for hardware and
bandwidth) so they've got the final say on any policy decision like
this...

Thanks for the comments,

Yours,

Tom