My first response is "+1" but I certainly don't want to alienate the community members that are still using these technologies.
We have spent a lot of time in making Isis enterprise grade by relying on proven and supported components like Datanucleus/JDO, Shiro and Wicket and I invite everybody to switch over. Personally I think the community is too small to maintain all these components so we should join forces on a smaller codebase. What can we do to make everybody switch over to the well maintained components? Cheers, Jeroen On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 1:53 PM, Dan Haywood <[email protected]> wrote: > ... and, in a similar vein, I think we should also retire: > > * the LDAP security mechanism (because it is superceded by the Shiro > security mechanism) > * the SQL security mechanism (because it has never been completed and also > is superceded by Shiro). > > Dan > > > On 21 March 2013 12:34, Dan Haywood <[email protected]> wrote: > >> All, >> Something I've been meaning to raise for a while is whether we should >> retire the HTML viewer. (I did mail Kevin about this offline because he >> has historically been the most active user of this viewer; I'll let him >> respond with his views rather than me summarizing them) . >> >> My view is that we're only actively developing Scimpi and Wicket, and that >> both are more functional than the HTML viewer that is not being developed. >> I'm keen that we trim our codebase of stuff that isn't in active >> development. I think that we should therefore retire this viewer. >> >> To generalize the point, it might also make sense to institute some sort >> of rule that we retire stuff that hasn't had any updates after a certain >> period of time, eg 12 or 18 months. (Perhaps such a rule might require a >> formal vote, but probably worth discussing here) >> >> Anyway, your thoughts welcome. >> >> Thx >> Dan >>
