[Tim] > I'd go for it, *provided* we aren't shy about revoking dev status > when it doesn't work out. Revoke first, argue later <0.5 wink>. [Skip Montanaro] > I hope we don't have to get that harsh. Locking out someone who's screwing up isn't harsh, it's healthy self-preservation. Don't be so fucking nice <wink>. > I wonder more about the people who are already listed as developers > but never exercise their privilege. So long as they don't get in the way, I don't mind. It's *silly* to keep inactive developers on the list, but until someone hacks the code base from an account they've forgotten they had, I don't think it's doing any real harm.
RetroSearch is an open source project built by @garambo | Open a GitHub Issue
Search and Browse the WWW like it's 1997 | Search results from DuckDuckGo
HTML:
3.2
| Encoding:
UTF-8
| Version:
0.7.4