+1 for option 3 if no one currently is taking ownership of that project. I 
think it's a useful signal to potential adopters about what they should expect. 

On 2013-05-21, at 12:47 PM, Andy Seaborne <[email protected]> wrote:

> SDB is getting some user attention but not much developer attention.  I was 
> hoping that there would be a contribution to go with JENA-447 but nothing has 
> come in.  I don't have the bandwidth to even answer questions about it 
> properly, partly because I don't use it.  I guess others are in a similar 
> position.
> 
> I do think we should be clear as to it's status.
> 
> In the future, I see these options:
> 
> 1/ Add jena-sdb to the main distribution.
>   (If it becomes a block on a release, remove it.)
> 
> 2/ As is - release "sometimes".
> 
> 3/ Dormant SDB.
>   This is the last release unless some activity arises to maintain it.
>   Keep the source around but move out of trunk.
>   Can be built from source.
> 
> 4/ Legacy SDB.
>   More definite statement than (3) that it is dropped.
>   Keep the source around.
> 
> For 3 and 4, where there are no plans to release again if nothing changes, 
> the snapshot builds should be stopped.  Users can build from source if they 
> want to but the current snapshot should not become a 
> distribution-under-the-radar which I feel it becomes if there are no plans to 
> make it a formal release.
> 
> Thoughts?
> 
> I'm tending towards doing this one last release then (3).
> 
>    Andy

Reply via email to