On 7/29/06, Martin van den Bemt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Henning Schmiedehausen wrote:
> Hm,
>
> We should make the effort to distinguish between stable projects/code
> and dormant/dead code.
Totally agree.. Though we have to figure out if slide is dormant or mature.
I cannot judge if it is one or the other. Based on the stuff I read on it (eg
jackrabbit-dev), it
seems more like dormant then mature though.
The issue of "dormant" and "stable" code is something we need to
figure out throughout Apache. For example, I believe Excalibur counts
as stable (if not dormant). Similar comments have been made about
several other projects.
Here are some of the issues about dormant/stable code:
We want to avoid the SourceForge syndrome of a lot of inactive
projects. I don't like the idea that a new user browsing Apache
websites can't tell which ones are active and which ones are not.
We need a pathway both into dormancy and out of dormancy. If a new
group of developers want to pick up old code and run with it, what's
the policy? Fork it? Put it through the incubator?
While we have archive.apache.org, that's a little harsh for some of
these projects. There still are users and there may be (as henning
pointed out) occasional releases. At the same time, do these projects
need the overhead of a full PMC and quarterly reporting to the board?
My point is, I think we need to come up with a solution that can scale
across Apache so that we can send a consistent message to our users.
--
jaaron
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
