On Thu Jun 14 20:22:22 2012, ECARROLL wrote:
Show quoted text> Something is deprecated if there is a better alternative, or there is
> another way of achieving that functionality.
>
> Something is unmaintained if you no longer wish to reply to requests or
> accept patches. You can explicitly state that you'll accept patches but
> not author them yourself.
>
> Something is abandoned if you're willing to give it up someone else.
>
> I'm just curious to know why ASP4 was "DEPRECATED". It seems perhaps the
> right term is "abandoned"; and, that you should offer maintainership to
> someone else so your work can live on.
Hello Evan,
Excellent point. I don't plan on doing any more maintenance work on
ASP4, so perhaps "abandoned" or "unmaintained" would be correct. The
code is on github under
https://github.com/jdrago999/ASP4
Also, thanks for your work on AWS::S3
I started ASP4 years ago and have written a few dozen web applications
with it. *I* won't be doing any active maintenance on it (as far as I
can tell). This doesn't mean someone else couldn't work on it.
ASP4 is from a time before Catalyst, Mojolicious and Dancer - frameworks
which have all surpassed what ASP4 is, was and would be. I had
considered writing a successor to ASP4, but after seeing how nice those
frameworks are I decided I could probably do something else with my
spare time.
My original motivations for ASP4 (and Class::DBI::Lite, Router::Generic,
ASP4x::Router and ASP4x::Linker): TDD, centralized configuration,
mod_perl2 synergy, declarative url routing, persisted forms, etc -- have
all been answered well in other frameworks now.
If you'd like to discuss this some more, please let me know.
Best regards,
John Drago
