Add-on removal - Reason

[Oblivion Knight]

A bit of a bugbear is when a resource author opts to remove their resource(s). Which is fair enough, that is their decision..

However, we as users are notified in a reply - and the first question everyone wants answered is why. Whether they're using the resource and ought to consider alternative options, or whether it's a user wanting the resource that is no longer available.. It'd be nice to have a basic reason from the author (or staff member removing the resource on safety grounds) on the removal notice.

 

[Ozzy47]

It would be nice, but ultimately this would be up to the developer to add, XF has nothing to do with it.

 

[Mouth]

XF has nothing to do with it.

XF regularly does cleansing and removal of unmaintained resources. It just looks like the author did it. Yes, another well discussed 'bugbear' of the resources function.

 

[Ozzy47]

XF regularly does cleansing and removal of unmaintained resources. It just looks like the author did it. Yes, another well discussed 'bugbear' of the resources function.

That has been addressed before and has nothing to do with what the OP is asking.

A bit of a bugbear is when a resource author opts to remove their resource(s). Which is fair enough, that is their decision..

 

[Oblivion Knight]

It was more a request that whoever deletes the resource be prompted with an optional / mandatory "reason" field if one does not already exist.

 

[Ozzy47]

The housekeeping is an automated process and that has been asked before to be mark it as removed due to author inactivity but has not happened yet.

 

[Mouth]

has nothing to do with what the OP is asking.

A bit of understanding that the requestor might not know the full scope of what they are asking goes a long way.