Re: sf.net download page

Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> On Mon, 07 Jan 2008 09:43:03 -0800
> Devrim GÜNDÜZ <devrim(at)commandprompt(dot)com> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>
>> On Mon, 2008-01-07 at 15:24 +0100, Magnus Hagander wrote:
>>> Or... I'll just throw this one out again. Why don't we remove
>>> those ;-)
>> I don't see any "harm" keeping the tarballs in sf.net. I can maintain
>> it, np.
>
> As long as it is maintained I see no harm either. The problem is
> insuring it is maintained. IMO it would be great to have the Win32
> installer up there too.

Sure, as long as it's maintained. But having just one person doing is
not good enough, IMHO (I know, Devrim never sleeps and never goes on
vacation, but something could change that..) And the people who do
maintain it should update it *every time* something we have on there
updates, and do it right away. (as in a couple of days right away, not
in a couple of minutes). Traditionally this has not been the case more
than once.

So. As long as it's maintained, I see no harm either. I also don't see
any gain, really. Whereas I see the risk of harm whenever it falls into
non-maintenance.

What's the actual *gain* of having it there?

//Magnus