Re: [GNU-linux-libre] what of the distros that have already asked for consideration or have been partially evaluated?

[bill-auger]

On 03/21/2018 11:42 PM, Ivan Zaigralin wrote:
> This is consistent with the existing policy of
> not continually evaluating the distro after it's been accepted. 

i dont think that is a formal policy - one of the strict criteria is to
be "actively maintained" - i would like to think that it is only the
case that no one has done any follow-up reviews - adfeno and myself did
just that last summer for perhaps the first time - there were some
significant issues to address and we created a dedicated wiki page[1] to
note them

there has been a long discussion of this recently whereby static
read-only "live" distros could probably be exempt but in most cases, i
think the consensus is that distros that are demonstrably defunct (such
as BLAG) should not be actively endorsed - and that should even perhaps
be extended to include those which exist but are unresponsive to the
community (such as proteanOS)

if it is the policy to distros to be grandfathered in all perpetuity, i
really do think that should be re-considered - at least in the cases
where there is no longer any concrete distro in existence and/or where
there is no maintainer participating on this list - i think these should
perhaps be moved to a category of "historical mention"


[1]: https://libreplanet.org/wiki/Periodic_Distro_Status_Review

signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature