On 4 September 2015 at 01:38, Ricordisamoa <ricordisa...@openmailbox.org> wrote: > Il 04/09/2015 01:24, Brandon Harris ha scritto: >>> On Sep 3, 2015, at 4:06 PM, Ricordisamoa<ricordisa...@openmailbox.org> >>> wrote:
>>> I appreciate the acknowledgement of failure. >> I don't think that's what was said at all. You may wish to >> re-read all of this. > Putting "active development" on hold when the software is little used in > production and even some features a MVP should have had are missing, really > sounds like a failure to me, although Danny has been very good at not making > it sound like it. > "To better address the needs of our core contributors", "we shift the team's > focus to these other priorities", "communities that are excited about Flow > discussions will be able to use it" It read to me and many others like a fairly standard set of euphemisms for when a project is killed but nobody wants to say "killed". Perhaps we're all reading it wrong. So, non-euphemistically: could someone please detail what, precisely, is and is not the level of resource commitment to Flow? (And how it compares to e.g. the level of resource commitment to LQT.) - d. _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
