README: Mention that the package is not actively maintained or tested, and add a call for maintainers #224
Conversation
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
…, and add a call for maintainers
DilumAluthge
requested review from
DrChainsaw,
MilesCranmer,
Moelf and
kescobo
MilesCranmer
approved these changes
Jan 2, 2025
|
I'll merge this now, since I think it's an improvement over the status quo (which is that nothing is mentioned in the README). I've requested several other people for review. If reviewers have post-merge review comments, I can make follow-up PRs to address them. |
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.
Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.
Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.
Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.
You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.
Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.
This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.
Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.
Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.
Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.
Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Alternative to #197.
The difference from #197 is that in this PR, we explicitly say that we have the goal of splitting up this package (#58).
#197 says "looking for a maintainer" - in this PR, we instead explicitly ask only for people to maintain a single manager. I think this is a more realistic goal. I think it's more likely that we can find e.g. three separate people to maintain three separate managers vs. finding a single person willing to maintain all of the managers that currently live in this package.