On Thu, 1 Apr 2021 at 06:58, Hervé BOUTEMY <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> looking at Falcon retirement [1], which has a Git repo:
> - current Gitbox repo is attic-falcon.git [2]
> - but GitHub (where everybody is looking at) is still falcon.git [3]

Well spotted.

> And on GitHub, a clear sign of retirement for users exists, that has not been
> activated on this falcon.git: that is **archived** repositories, like [4]

Agreed.

> IMHO:
> 1. Renaming Gitbox repo (and only Gitbox) should not happen
> 2. Marking GitHub repository as archived should be done
> for past and future Attic moved projects Git repositories

Are we all agreed that:
- projects which are moved to the Attic should not have their
repositories renamed
- repositories should instead be made read-only and marked as such (as per [4])

If so, I will raise an INFRA JIRA to get the existing repo renames reverted.

Thanks
> Regards,
>
> Hervé
>
> [1] http://attic.apache.org/projects/falcon.html
>
> [2] https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/attic-falcon.git
>
> [3] https://github.com/apache/falcon
>
> [4] https://github.com/apache/tomcat55
>
> Le mercredi 31 mars 2021, 11:40:25 CEST sebb a écrit :
> > On Wed, 31 Mar 2021 at 08:37, Mads Toftum <[email protected]> wrote:
> > > On Wed, Mar 31, 2021 at 01:02:58AM +0100, sebb wrote:
> > > > Infra say that the rename of the Git repos was to allow write access
> > > > by Attic people.
> > > > I assume that the attic- prefix turns it into an Attic-controlled repo.
> > > >
> > > > This would allow Attic access and deny project access.
> > > >
> > > > Project access can also be denied by dropping the LDAP group (which
> > > > happens anyway).
> > > >
> > > > Even if we did still need temporary write access, there are better
> > > > ways to manage it than renaming the repo.
> > > > For example, by joining the LDAP group before it is deleted.
> > > >
> > > > I did not need write access for any of the recent projects that I dealt
> > > > with.>
> > > Yeah, I suppose the main argument in favor of moving it would be to make
> > > it clear that you're looking at an attic codebase.
> >
> > The Attic only means something within the ASF.
> >
> > > I see the
> > > inconvenience of broken links, but on balance maybe it's better to have
> > > a clear signal that this is an unmaintained repo?
> >
> > There are other ways to signal that a repo is unmaintained.
> >
> > The attic- prefix in a repo name does not clearly indicate to the
> > general public that the repo is unmaintained.
> >
> > > vh
> > >
> > > Mads Toftum
> > > --
> > > http://flickr.com/photos/q42/
>
>
>
>

Reply via email to