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]
