What is meta? ×
Meta Stack Exchange is where users like you discuss bugs, features, and support issues that affect the software powering all 130 Stack Exchange communities.

I followed Compiler Design proposal and I follow Operating System Development. I can't figure out why one was closed and other not. Someone can explain why the first one fits on SO and the second one doesn't?

For my understanding both should be closed OR both should stay open.

Related: Why is the Compiler Design proposal on hold?

share|improve this question
1  
For what it is worth, Operating Systems Development was put under the radar at the same time that Compiler Design was (both were mentioned under the Merging Season blog post). So at the very least, we can assume they didn't just glaze over it. –  Grace Note Nov 15 '10 at 22:39
2  
Because there are already too many compilers, but nowhere near enough operating systems... –  Shog9 Nov 15 '10 at 23:15
1  
It's simple, OSD will die without the crew having to do something painful. Better that way. –  Uphill Luge Nov 16 '10 at 0:02

1 Answer 1

up vote 5 down vote accepted

The cleanup and development of Area 51 is an on-going effort, so the list of proposals is far from a fait accompli. Area 51 is in a bit of a transitional state — part feature enhancement and part cleanup work. So let me give you a bit of an overview of where we are on both fronts.

On the development end, we are adding features to Area 51 to enable more communications between proposals. The general idea is to group related proposals into "departments," much like you might group academic disciplines at a university. This will make it easier to add more communication facilities to help these groups of proposals work together and decide how to best allocate the creation of sites between them. More details about how that is going to work as the development efforts continue…

On the cleanup side— As a general rule, I have not been closing duplicates between similar (or even identical) proposals. Nor do I want to rush to judgment about the viability of a proposal. Instead, I generally take a closer look at proposals as they enter Commitment. Once a proposal emerges with significant support, we can make some judgment calls about which proposals need to join forces to create viable sites. Until that time, I don't want to micromanage and stifle people's ideas before they've had a chance to go through the definition and support process. But I do close proposals which are obvious duplicates of Stack Exchange sites which have already been created.

Longer term, duplicates and merging will be much easier for the community to manage when proposals are better organized and we enable better communication. In the meantime, the community is still free to comment within each proposal and you can still vote to close… and certainly feel free to flag proposals for egregious problems.

share|improve this answer

You must log in to answer this question.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged .