On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 2:29 AM, Upayavira <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Tue, 2008-12-09 at 16:38 +0800, Niclas Hedhman wrote: >> On Tue, Dec 9, 2008 at 4:29 PM, Henri Yandell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> > Dunno - would it have more than one page? >> > >> > I was thinking www.apache.org/attic/ which then links to the old >> > locations for the docs etc. However... seeing as attic.apache.org >> > exists might as well stick the page there :) >> >> Wouldn't we inherit information about the retired projects and need to >> link their old docs and stuff up? >> >> Otherwise, how do you need what is in the Attic? For instance, if >> Project X retire subproject Y to Attic, it is not reasonable to assume >> that the documentation of Y will be hosted by Project X. Two >> generations of developers later, we should assume they forgot all >> about Y and not maintain Y's docs anymore. > > If something is retired to the attic, it needs to be retired. That is, > its docs need to move. Just as with incubation, we need labeling. If we > just leave docs where they are, there is no indication whatever that > anything has changed. > > Take Apache Jabba. A state of the art graphical interface for the > Commodore 64. No developers anymore (I wonder why), so it moves to: > > http://attic.apache.org/jabba > > Of course, there are redirects/links from jabba.apache.org to the attic > site. Ideally a page would have a "what is the attic" link, but I'm sure > most folks could work that out by just going to http://attic.apache.org.
The problem with moving a project within the Attic namespace, is the sheer amount of work involved. We have TLPs who have promoted out of a project who have not managed to do that work and instead still have their own site, or no site at all. I agree though that just leaving things where they are isn't enough as it looks like business as usual. I think the better solution is to mark those documents (or svn location, or JIRA project, or wiki etc) as having had their project moved to the Attic. Trying to migrate things and keep the old urls happy etc is unnecessary make-work imo. On the plus side - we've identified our first major discussion topic, so doing well. :) Here's what we had as a first draft at ApacheCon (and on the OldProjectProposal project page): * Close PMC down. * SVN read only. * Add banner to websites. * Contextual email to user list once a year saying it's dead. Suggest alternative projects. * Kill the dev list. * README on archives. * Kill builds. * JIRA: Move to Retired projects. Update description. Point url to attic. (Make retired projects commentable?) * Bugzilla: Stop new issues. How does that sound? What's missing, what's wrong, what's poorly explained? Hen
