After some discussions with some pear-devs on IRC (Aaron mainly gave the
bit for me to bring it to public again) I start more and more to take
over the opinion that inventing a "orphan" flag would be much better
than deleting orphan proposals.
The idea is to keep the timeframes as described in the proposal
currently in votes phase and replace the "delete" action by a "mark as
oprhan" action. Orphan proposals will then be listed on an extra page.
The benefits inherited from that are:
a) A PEARWeb admin could easily reactivate the proposal, if the
maintainer decides to push it further.
b) If someone else proposes a similar package to one being marked as
oprhan, one can still refer to the orphan one and bring maintainers in
I think this solution would fix the problems people told me about with
the proposed process. Opinions please!?
If we decide to change the proposal as described above we also need a
way to merge the changes into the current proposal. AFAI can see there
are 2 possibilities:
a) Deleting the current proposal and restart it with the changes named.
b) Edit the current proposal to reflect the changes (which will not
allow people who already voted to re-cast their votes).
So, what do you think?