Rainer Klute wrote on Sunday, March 04, 2007 7:49 AM:
> Daniel F. Savarese schrieb:
>> In message <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Andrew C. Oliver" writes:
>>
>>> lists. (If you disagree look at the list archive for
>>> each over the last 6 months and see if you REALLY disagree in more
>>> than THEORY).
>>>
>>
>> At least for oro, some Linux distributions continue to ship it as
>> part of their core packages. For example, Fedora Core 4, 5, and 6
>> all included it and 7 will include it as well. That's millions of
>> real installations. It would be negligent to give the impression
>> that Apache will no longer support the software should maintenance
>> requests be made when there are in fact committers dedicated to
>> doing the work. No, there haven't been any bug reports for oro for
>> years and I don't know why it ships with Linux distributions, but it
>> does and until it doesn't, it's not a "dead" project. There's no
>> need for project-specific mailing lists anymore, but I'm -1 on
>> putting up a "closed" page for any project with a user base that
>> continues to require support and for which we are able to provide
>> support. Users do need to be directed somewhere for support and I
>> don't care if that's general@ or some other list as long as there's
>> an avenue for providing that support.
+1
> I strogly agree with Daniel. Even if there are no ongoing
> activities on
> a project, we should never, NEVER call it "dead" or give it any other
> attributation with a negative tone. "Dormant" also has negative
> implications. "Mature" would be fine.
"Maintenance mode" - it implies that there is not much activity, but bugs get
addressed. Additionally it has not that unfortunate touch of final i.e. new
functionality/refactoring may happen if enough interested peaople work together.
- Jörg
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
