Ethics Question

I’m working on migrating the ActionsForge to its new server, and I keep running across these Actions by Weaver. He has been gone from the scene for many years now, and many of these Actions are showing signs of decay with no support in site. Should I delete them? That seems harsh, but it also seems to me that I’m leaving a rake lying in the grass tines-up if I put them on the new server… anyone could step on that.

Walter


actionsdev mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

Could you somehow just stick a notice up saying that these actions are no longer supported and may not work in the current version of FW?


actionsdev mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

The issue is that some (many) need cleaning up – the new site is more strict about uploads, so PDFs and other non-Action files need to be zipped and re-uploaded. Weaver had several like that. I haven’t heard from him in many years, so I’m not sure how to get in touch. “Weaver” isn’t actually even his name, it’s his nom de plume, since his family is in the rug trade.

Walter

On Apr 29, 2014, at 12:02 AM, Caleb Grove wrote:

Could you somehow just stick a notice up saying that these actions are no longer supported and may not work in the current version of FW?


actionsdev mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options


actionsdev mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

Hmm…I guess what I would do is not add any actions that require reworking to get them to work with the new ActionsForge (that was a convoluted sentence). Should that not be the action developers responsibility?


actionsdev mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

Walt, is there any merit in having an archive of old actions?

Perhaps some of the old actions could be used as a base to be developed further in future should someone take up the challenge?

Otherwise, I see no reason to keep, nor any ethical issue in deleting unsupported non-functioning actions. Your description of the potential downside is appropriate!

They are traps waiting for the unwary!

Cheers,

Peter


actionsdev mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

Oh, and I forgot to say thanks for all the work - I look forward to seeing the result!

Cheers,

Peter


actionsdev mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

At 21:58 -0400 28/4/14, Walter Lee Davis wrote:

I’m working on migrating the ActionsForge to its new server, and I
keep running across these Actions by Weaver. He has been gone from
the scene for many years now, and many of these Actions are showing
signs of decay with no support in site. Should I delete them? That
seems harsh, but it also seems to me that I’m leaving a rake lying
in the grass tines-up if I put them on the new server… anyone
could step on that.

Walter


actionsdev mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

His family business is Coastal Designer Rugs and has a contact page at:
<www.coastalrugs.com/webstore/contact/>
His Actions page is still live too:
<www.coastalrugs.com/Actions/>

  • I just have some old archive messages.

David


David Ledger - Freelance Unix Sysadmin in the UK.
email@hidden
www.ivdcs.co.uk


actionsdev mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

Personally I think it is unfair on action users to be tempted into using one of Weaver’s actions that has not received an update in many years.

Is Moo itself still being developed? I know that Weaver had started work on migrating his actions away from Moo.

I think it would be best to leave them out of the equation as without support they really are past it.

D


actionsdev mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options

I’ve heard back from Weaver, and he’s going to edit the new Forge to make sure that what is available there is what is supported. I have no idea what that may end up being, but he’s on it.

Walter

On Apr 29, 2014, at 3:11 PM, DeltaDave wrote:

Personally I think it is unfair on action users to be tempted into using one of Weaver’s actions that has not received an update in many years.

Is Moo itself still being developed? I know that Weaver had started work on migrating his actions away from Moo.

I think it would be best to leave them out of the equation as without support they really are past it.

D


actionsdev mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options


actionsdev mailing list
email@hidden
Update your subscriptions at:
http://freewaytalk.net/person/options