EDGI Repo Audit

[Frijol]

Update: repos were discussed at 1/9/19 cross-team dev meeting & outcomes are:

Archive

• edgi-trello-backups
• datavis-projects
• url-proxy
• s3-upload-server
• analysis
• go-calc-diff
• guides
• fiscal

Delete

• warcprox(fork)
• grab-site(fork)
• dolley-madison(fork)

All other repos

Active & should be maintained!
(Breaking out components of specific standardization & maintenance in their own issues)

---

(original issue description)

tl;dr: let's check over EDGI's current active repos and determine whether any should be archived. Here's a spreadsheet– I suggest all repos listed with latest activity older than a year as of today (excepting the video landing call page) be archived.

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1IcPchZkOGjQnTUqRb9oH01Q9B7zZSAKtdU1F9mA51QA/edit?usp=sharing

• Look at spreadsheet ^ and discuss what repos to keep/archive
• Replace this checklist with a checklist of repos to archive in order to resolve this issue

Context

I'm working on a cleanup of EDGI's open source face. There are several good-hygiene practices currently in issues– ready to be applied across all active repos:

• Improve ability for first time contributors to get involved #179 on making sure each repo has a contributor guide and tagging first-time-contributor issues
• Need standard policy on stale issues and repos #212 applying the "stale issue" policy across repos
• Create a core set of labels across projects #193 apply a core set of labels across all repos
• Review Code of Conduct #207 making sure every repo references a code of conduct

Before doing all that work on EDGI's 33 not-archived repos, I'd like us to take a look at which repos we intend to maintain, and which would be better archived.

Proposal

Per the conversation in #212, I'm not proposing that we adopt a rule for archiving repos in general.

However, I think a good starting point for this audit is to archive all of the repos with no activity (at all, including issue comments) in the last year, with the exception of the video call landing page.

Reader, please do:

Many of you know these repos, their histories, and their current uses, much better than I do! Please take a look at this spreadsheet and note (either here or in the spreadsheet) about any repos you feel should/should not be archived.

[Mr0grog]

We did a run-through of the red lines in the sheet in the cross-team meeting today. We had two that we didn’t think should be archived and thought someone should give the forks a slightly closer look first:

• If everything in the fork got merged upstream, maybe just delete it.
• If it didn’t get merged upstream (or even proposed), should it be? Does it need a shepherd? (If no, archive.)

[Mr0grog]

I went through and checked on the changes in the forks and updated the sheet with what I think we should archive vs. delete. None of them appear to need any shepherding.

[lightandluck]

Discussed with Nick and Steph and the fiscal repo should be archived

[Frijol]

Thanks @lightandluck, reflected that change in the checklist above.

Looks like I don't have the permissions to archive or delete repos– can someone who does please take this one on?

[Mr0grog]

Are we certain on the checklist? I can smash repos.

[Mr0grog]

After 20 days with no feedback on the issues for each repo, I’ve archived (or deleted) all of them. Should we close this issue now, or is there more to do? /cc @Frijol

[Frijol]

Yay! Thanks for the diligence on that @Mr0grog. Closing!