I disagree, it’s completely relevant. We’re not talking about who took the action to “close” the plugin. Rather, we’re discussing public’s perception of a listing in CP directory if plugin is “closed” or “inactive”. The warning/label can be whatever makes sense, “inactive” label is just what I call it.
Again I’m curious to see pro de-lesting camp answer my 2 questions:
- What’s the point of abandoned plugins policy if plugin is already gone from directory and no way to confirm if it’s a fork or not?
- What will happen if plugin developer does come back and wants to be listed again? Re-listing? That’s extra work that isn’t necessary.
I would like to understand your side of the argument for de-listing as it fits within the whole plugin ecosystem.
I’m beginning to think CP isn’t as open as it wants to be. We’re trying to parent users a bit too much. Yes, average users are quiet inexperienced. I deal with them daily providing support, free and paid. Typical users look for plugins inside admin, so if the plugin isn’t listed there most users won’t know about it and won’t be able to install it. Even if it’s still listed, but “inactive”, on CP.net directory.
To add, if they do search in Google, it doesn’t matter if plugin is listed in CP directory or not, they will find GitHub report and manually install it. And if they do find “inactive” listing, so what? They still can’t install it. And most users, even average users, won’t install a plugin that has a warning on it or is very old or has low star rating. They try to stay away from them, they rely on social signals to figure out what plugin to use or not.