I mostly lurk at this point, but this thread is so chilling that I must add my two cents even though it looks like the group is pretty well decided on wiping away 4.5. While Liza is being a little caustic in telling people that they should stick to being programmers while she's the non-techie expert, she does have a very strong point regarding software availability vs. support. Here's why: NANNY STATE VS. FREE STATE Functionally removing Drupal 4.5 is not just saying "we don't support this, and we highly recommend that you upgrade to 4.7 because 4.5 is a security risk." Removing 4.5 is saying "you WON'T use 4.5 because we don't think that is a good idea." Functionally we're deciding what's best for people, not recommending and giving them the choice. That's like the state telling you how to have sex vs. giving recommendations and ultimately leaving it up to you. If the 4.5 user gets an STD, that's mostly his problem. The compromised site might reflect poorly on Drupal just a tad, just like someone with STDs affects his society. But, is the loss of freedom worth that little net gain for the community? For an open source community, I find it strange that we're effectively dictating what can and cannot be done. CVS ACCESS ALONE FUNCTIONALLY KILLS 4.5 CVS access still is access, but functionally it kills 4.5 for a lot of people because it adds a much higher technical barrier than existed when they initially installed their installation. Putting 4.5 in an archive section effectively warns people against using an old version, but a non-techie who can't easily upgrade still gets access. This less technically inclined or otherwise busy person might not be able to use CVS, however, so we're barring them from 4.5. By removing forum posts, etc., we're cutting 4.5 people off at the knees even more. Far from stopping support, we're actively erasing what already exists. This is as if all major web sites dealing with Win XP are erased when Vista comes out. And yes, other people might have pages about Drupal 4.5 on the web--but as THE place to go for Drupal needs, almost all support for 4.5 is on the Drupal sites that will be erased. DRUPAL IS NOT MICROSOFT WORD MS Word 97 is on a CD and is self-contained, so a user can happily stick with the software for decades assuming he doesn't want the latest features. Drupal doesn't work that way, though, because a good portion of the possible functionality and promise comes from the related modules, themes and code snippets. When I choose 4.5 initially, I know there is certain functionality I can have. And, maybe I don't install it all at once, but I know it exists. By removing 4.5, we're effectively reducing the software to what the user currently has in use--unless of course they decide to download all the modules, all the themes, etc, as well as the docs, the night before it disappears from the Drupal site. Almost nobody will do that, so we're undercutting what the software used to do. 4.5 now is LESS than it was before, which is much different than merely stopping tech support and community development. This isn't a perfect analogy, but removing 4.5 from all but CVS is like stopping Google Maps, not upgrading MS Streets & Trips Planner. Drupal functionally requires community. BUSINESS USE VS. HOBBY USE Hobbyists can get away with cutting edge or even bleeding edge, software that sometimes doesn't work quite right, but businesses don't have that tolerance because the stakes are higher. Businesses started using open source largely when paid support options developed and very stable software versions emerged because they just couldn't gamble with the unstable, absolute latest and greatest. I'm still installing new 4.6 installations for my clients because many modules I need are not yet ported to 4.7. It is scary enough from a business perspective that Drupal is not backwards compatible. Being all but forced to upgrade every other release seriously undercuts Drupal's commercial viability. If Drupal primarily is a hobbyist community that doesn't care about my business needs, why would my business rely on Drupal? Technical elegance only goes so far if the point isn't software for its own sake. Apple Computers changes technical architecture relatively often, but users still can use OS 9 if they're stubborn (and there IS a decent upgrade path usually). By removing 4.5, We're saying businesses that use OS 9 are in deep trouble, more than just "you're on your own, bub." AN ARCHIVE ISN'T HARD TO DO OR COSTLY An archive won't dramatically use server resources if few people use it, and if it does get high use then that's a really strong signal that an archive is especially necessary. What is the really good argument for totally cutting the old community off at the knees? I am pretty busy, and I don't even use 4.5, but I'd be willing to help with an archive section if for some reason creating it takes more work than it seems. The Drupal community really is shooting itself in the foot if it effectively forces people to use the latest and greatest tech, which I think this policy does. Thanks for reading my 4am concerns. I'd much rather be sleeping, but this is too important. -Peter -- Peter Kowalke Port Chester, NY "Plausible fellow, but unsound." -Herbert Bayard Swope, former editor of the New York World