There was nothing in mine either, or my answer. I was simply pointing out that the distinction is fuzzy, and often the 'wrong' categorisation choice is made, based on the lack of firm criteria, and that I felt the choice was fairly arbitrary in the first place.

Note that rozallin used the term "polished", not "finished"

Actually, the exact phrase was "I have always regarded Code Catacombs as a place for finished polished code"...(unless my cut'n'paste is inserting random words again {g}) - hence my making the jokey point about code never being finished, which you kindly repeated.

As for the point about distinguishing between 'tentative' and 'tested' code, again I think this is extremely fuzzy, and why bother trying to make it? As you say, the Catacombs is an excellent place to maintain code - why not have it spend its whole life cycle there? At what point would somebody decide to 'move' their code from Craft to Catacombs? Would the node move? Or would we simply get duplicated code - an old version in Craft, and newer versions in Catacombs? All this could simply be replaced, as I said, with a "status" indicator, which (if were required) would be able to give a finer granularity than simply "tentative/tested".

Cheers, Ben.