>> I don't see why that prevents others from maintaining them That kind of goes against years of project best practices. Generally when you have a software project, new features and improvements are released as major versions. The assumption is that older versions are deprecated. This can repeat forever or until the project hits maturity/stability. I feel that this is the norm for most successful projects.
I think the scenario you are describing is called a branch. That is when a project is supporting 2 heads, and im talking about software version heads here. The problem is that the branches will complete for features and users and developer attention. Thats ok, projects branch all the time. But if you are saying that 2 branches should live in the same project house and PMC, I dont know if I agree with that. That leads to confusion, disagreement, competition, all kinds of bad things. I personally dont have the will to move forward with such a project, it takes a mental and emotional toll out of you. This project has drained the joy of software out of me because I am spending all my time trying to find some kind of rational organization here. Maybe im just stuck in my old ways which is why I am prepared to move my branch elsewhere. When there is less room for disagreement and competition, there is more room for fun. On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 12:32 PM, Bertrand Delacretaz <[email protected] > wrote: > On Wed, Apr 1, 2015 at 6:16 PM, Reza Naghibi <[email protected]> wrote: > > ...So I for one have no interest into supporting these clients.... > > Which is totally fine, but I don't see why that prevents others from > maintaining them. > > -Bertrand >
