GitHub Hygiene: Develop a standard way to indicate a repo/project is deprecated #54
Comments
|
We should also probably consider something similar for repos that are not really usable yet, but currently just works in progress. |
|
Really like those three final bullets explaining the context behind deprecation. |
|
Yeah, agree with @ZenGround0. Plan sounds good to me. |
|
Sounds good to me as well, but I would add that we make the repository archived/read-only if it's deprecated as well. This can be done in the "Options" of a repository, under "Danger Zone" > "Archive this repository " |
I think that’s generally a good idea, but we certainly ran into some opposition when we started to do that a few weeks ago. It would be good to have feedback from folks like @jbenet. Maybe the big issue before was in differentiating between things that are deprecated and things that are on indefinite hold/hibernation/not-active-not-dead-just-a-zombie (in which case we should be careful to also describe and tag those appropriately). I’m not sure. |
|
OK, I think we need to move forward with this. I’ll bring this up for last call feedback in next week’s all hands (2018-04-30). In the mean time, I think what we’ve locked down on here is:
@jbenet I would really appreciate your feedback here, especially on the last point about archiving. I know you’ve had some particular concerns on that. Again, I’ll make a last call for comments here in next week’s all hands. Barring any major concerns, let’s aim to have this decided by the end of next Wednesday (2018-05-02) and use this space for tracking updates to all the relevant repos. |
|
@Mr0grog this all sounds good to me. The point on downsides of archiving repos, i think we can take some of these case by case if it looks like theres still ongoing discussion. But otherwise, archiving them should help shift discussion to more constructive places (i.e. maintained repos) |
|
@mgoelzer could you help with this cleanup effort? |
|
@mgoelzer have you seen this spreadsheet? https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1IDVAGfniyHCJLIxLc3y7K7YTOFGCtgwTVCZEojtNLlw/edit#gid=0 It provides a little more information on what is and isn’t deprecated than last-updated-date (which is also super helpful for all the orange rows, which are "unclear status"). |
|
@Mr0grog Thanks - I had not seen the spreadsheet. It's much more useful imo. I'm happy to do the work of deprecating repos (per the process you proposed), but need help knowing which repos should definitely be deprecated, which are up for debate, etc. |
|
Great! @flyingzumwalt suggested making a last call for comments on the proposed process at Monday’s all hands, so I was holding off on discussing which repos to apply that to — I assume some will be contentious and it would be hard to sort out that discussion from any comments on the process. That said, we could definitely normalize the labeling on the repos that are already somehow marked as deprecated (gray rows in the sheet):
And the ones that are supremely obvious or that folks have already stated are dead on Slack & IRC: |
|
OK, there’s been no other feedback, so I think we are good with the rules laid out above in #54 (comment) . @mgoelzer I don’t have the rights to modify topics/descriptions/archived status anywhere, so if you’ve got the time and interest to help on updating things, that’d be incredibly wonderful. EDIT: moved this checklist to the top of this issue so it’s more visible. |
|
https://github.com/ipfs/go-metrics-prometheus is alive and being used there isn't just much to develop there |
|
@Kubuxu Great, I’ve removed it from the list and added it to #55. Should I do the same with go-metrics-interface? Would you please either:
|
|
Same with go-metrics-interface. Will do. |
|
https://github.com/ipfs/go-ipfs-blockservice/ now removed by @Stebalien. |
Mr0grog
added
help wanted
|
Update here: we have a way we want to mark things and a list of repos that probably need those markings (see top of this thread). What this needs is individuals to:
Anybody who’s got some free time, just pick one repo from the list that’s not checked off and do the above! It would be enormously helpful. |
meiqimichelle
added
topic/design-content
jessicaschilling
changed the title
jessicaschilling
added
Priority: P2 (Medium)
and removed
Priority: P0 (Critical)
labels
jessicaschilling
added
topic/docs
|
Support on this didn't follow through, and initial effort is now outdated. Closing. |
Developers who are building things on top of IPFS have pretty much all indicated that they’ve solved a lot of their problems by digging through IPFS source code and through the repos here on GitHub. Unfortunately, a huge proportion of repos there are deprecated, but not clearly marked as such (gray, red, and possibly many of the orange lines in that spreadsheet), making that job much harder.
We won’t suddenly have perfect docs that solve all of their problems tomorrow, so we should coming up with a standard way of marking out deprecated repos that we can easily and quickly apply:
I’d suggest:
(Edit: surfacing our final decisions here so they are easy to find)
Conclusions/Final Process
deprecatedto the repo (pulling this over from GitHub Hygiene: Develop a standard way to indicate non-code repos #57)ipfs.js, while a non-dead, non-archived one might benewsletter, where we might bring it back in the future.support, this also prevents people from posting new issues.Checklist of Repos to Fix
Definitely deprecated repos:
Things that might be dead, but need clarity from their owners/maintainers:
Already archived, but missing standard notices: (How much do we care to update?)
Turned out not to be dead:
https://github.com/ipfs/js.ipfs.io(2018-06-04 Per @diasdavid, this now has active work)https://github.com/ipfs/ipfs-hubot(Magically risen from the dead once someone pointed it out)The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: