Oh, well, that sounds great then. Thanks for the reply. One thing though: you mention in your post to the ML, "removing things with low test coverage, poor docs

Oh, well, that sounds great then. Thanks for the reply. One thing though: you mention in your post to the ML, "removing things with low test coverage, poor docs or things which simply are not the best option". I just hope, along with that, you have the other side of the coin: liberally bring in new things which have good test coverage, good docs, and which are a pretty darn good option. :)