attic-general mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeremias Maerki <>
Subject Re: Process for moving a project to the Attic
Date Sun, 04 Jan 2009 09:47:56 GMT
On 04.01.2009 10:08:48 Niclas Hedhman wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 4, 2009 at 4:56 PM, Henri Yandell <> 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 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.

Right. It might be counter-productive to kill user lists and disabling
issue trackers. There's always the off-chance that someone can provide
an answer to someone with a question. These are also entry vectors for
indicators that someone may want to revive a particular package. But
then, not many people remain on these lists to actually listen to any
signs of life. Idea: why not create a single Attic-based mailing list
for user-related questions on products in the Attc?

> 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 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.

That's probably the realistic take. Actally moving the project resources to
Attic would certainly be better (for the better signal that sends) but I
doubt we'll always have enough volunteer resources to do that. Imagine
just handling the different website generation tools and the fact that
not everyone followed best practice on website publishing. But even just
adding the "Attic banner" will trigger that problem. :-(

Should we start a list with Attic-candidates somewhere? In SVN? In
Bugzilla or JIRA? An issue tracker is probably better to track the

Jeremias Maerki

View raw message