On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 4:56 PM, Henri Yandell <[email protected]> wrote: > Before anyone will be happy moving into the Attic, they're going to > want to know what the effect will be. > > They'll also want to know how to get out - but I think that's > surprisingly easier and I've made a stab at it in the draft webpage. > > On the moving in - our ApacheCon discussion listed a bunch of ideas: > > * 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 automated builds. > * JIRA: Move to Retired projects. Update description. Point url to > attic. (Make retired projects commentable?) > * Bugzilla: Stop new issues. > > Additionally: > > * Add entry to the Attic site. > * Remove from www.apache.org index. > * Kill user list if dead.
"kill user list if dead" might be hard to know. kXML mailing list had a 1-2 new posts per year for instance. Also, what about the "disbanding the PMC" and "Board assigns Attic as the project owner"?? Otherwise sounds like a good start. > I think we'll get a better idea of this when the first project enters. > Until then - what are the thoughts on the above? The biggest > discussion item so far appears to be whether the Attic is a container > for projects - ie: we move the website, setup rewrites, move the SVN > code; or whether we adjust things in place and end up with a whole > series of directories around xxx.apache.org that we're covering. My take is that Attic acts as the 'check point' of the dormant resources, but they remain where they originally were. We just keep a directory of what that is. Cheers Niclas
