Let's do both. Website update and making the repo read-only.
On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 9:16 PM, Bruce Snyder <bruce.snyder@xxxxxxxxx>
What exactly is the point of this making it read-only? And how exactly do
you suggest it be deprecated? Given that the vast majority of users
probably would not see any evidence of either of these actions, I don't
understand the point of taking these actions.
As I stated previously in the other discussion, it would be a far more
effective communication to all users if the link to the Apollo website
moved beneath a heading named 'Attic' or 'Retired'. I'm not being
am trying to understand your goal and suggesting a more visible statement
On Wed, Dec 13, 2017 at 2:59 PM, Clebert Suconic <
I would like to propose making Apollo a read only project.
People can always fork it and maintain it themselves... but as of now
we haven't had anyone maintaining for the past 2 years.
We would make it read only... and would make it clear on the website
it's been deprecated and its repository is read only.
If you are positive about this, please send your +1.
If you have a reason to keep it active, please send your -1.
If you don't care and really want to express your opinion your 0.
I'm not sending a discuss thread for this, as I would like to keep
this voting an open conversation.. so if you have other options to how
we should do, I'm open for that here.
I am aiming to keep this thread open for 3 days.
Here is my +1 vote on making the git read only and deprecating it.
perl -e 'print
ActiveMQ in Action: http://bit.ly/2je6cQ
Blog: http://bsnyder.org/ <http://bruceblog.org/>