On Mon, 6 Mar 2006, Daniel F. Savarese wrote:
In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Yoav
Shapira" writes:
I do care, a lot, as a user. Active means bugs are getting fixed, the
mailing lists are a reasonable source for help, and if new standards
I think that's a reason why perhaps a finer gradation than inactive and
active may be in order. For example, if any new/real bug is reported
to ORO, it will get fixed in short order. If any enhancement that
includes a patch is submitted, it will be reviewed and applied or
rejected with a critique in short order. However, if an enhancement
request is made with no willingness on the part of the submitter to
help implement the enhancement, my guess is it will not be implemented
unless it's not particularly time-consuming. I see the spectrum more
as Active, Maintenance Mode, and Inactive, with subprojects like ORO and
Regexp being in Maintenance Mode. But if the difference boils down to
semantic perception, then as long as the meaning of Active vs. Inactive
is explained to the site visitor, I'm not going to quibble because a
project like ORO definitely falls into the category of "no new features
are planned for this product."
Active Development
Maintenance Mode
Unsupported
??
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
