Re: making a release

On Wed, May 03, 2017 at 0:35 AM, Alexandre Franke <[email protected]> wrote:
On Thu, Apr 27, 2017 at 7:45 PM, noskcaJ leahciM
<JACKSON-V80MEb/VGZiLI/3FLRupUti2O/[email protected]> wrote:

> Both of your messages were stuck in moderation with the stated reason
> that the sender was not subscribed to the list. You may be subscribed
> with a different address, or actually not subscribed at all.

Habitually I quote the domain as DECUS as it answers to both but forgot
mailman would see it as encompasserve.

> I was not aware of a desktop OS from Oracle. Do you have a link to
> more info? Perhaps even a searchable database of the packages (and
> versions) they provide?

A short overview is here: https://community.oracle.com/docs/DOC-996946

The searchable database of packages (with versions they provide) is at:

http://pkg.oracle.com/solaris/release/en/search.shtml?token=planner&action=Search

> Just a reminder that this is a list for developers. There is another
> one for non developement discussions.

> So while not abandonned (which unmaintained usually means) it is
> correct to say that it is not very actively maintained.

>> I would like to repudiate Oracle's claim that
>> it is not being maintained and so ask them to reverse their recent
>> decision to remove it.

> Well that is sad but I understand and respect their decision.

>> The version that had been being shipped by Oracle until earlier this
>> year, was Planner 0.14.4

> That version is very old, even by our standards. It's 8 years old, we
> since had 0.14.5 (6 years ago) and 0.14.6 (5 years ago). Granted
> there's been no release on our side for 5 years, but Oracle seems to
> be to blame too here.

So I'm now confused as to what your position is: Respect for Oracle
for having pulled an 8-year old "not very actively maintained" FOSS
package; or blame of Oracle for, instead, not having replaced with
a more recent release, *tha* version of Planner in their desktop
incorporation that is "very old, even by our standards."