Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Draft policy for claiming existing project names. #3314

Closed

Conversation

@jimfulton
Copy link

@jimfulton jimfulton commented Nov 25, 2017

This is prerrt conservative, but it's better than nothing.

This is prerrt conservative, but it's better than nothing.
@jimfulton jimfulton mentioned this pull request Nov 25, 2017
Copy link
Contributor

@benji-york benji-york left a comment

Would some specificity around how a renamed project's new name should be selected be helpful? Perhaps simply appending "-abandoned" to the project name.

The ideal would be some metadata that marks projects as abandoned, but a consistent naming scheme should be enough for the time being.

Copy link
Member

@humitos humitos left a comment

Also, how much is a considerable time for the author to reply the initial contact? I mean, how much time do I have before my project got renamed (for one of the reason that RTD could explain)?

@ericholscher
Copy link
Member

@ericholscher ericholscher commented Nov 27, 2017

Might be useful to start with this: https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0541/#reachability -- as it seems much more specific in regards to timing and contact.

@benji-york
Copy link
Contributor

@benji-york benji-york commented Nov 27, 2017

PEP-541 looks like a good resource. In fact, could we simply defer to its definition of "abandoned" to that PEP and have a policy something like "When a project is abandoned (as defined by PEP-541), a request to rename the project by suffixing "-abandoned" (adding incrementally-higher integers if needed for disambiguation) will be granted.

@ericholscher
Copy link
Member

@ericholscher ericholscher commented Nov 27, 2017

I think their full policy is quite good and thought out. We should likely adopt the full thing, with some basic changes (eg. s/downloads/pageviews/).

@humitos
Copy link
Member

@humitos humitos commented Nov 27, 2017

I think it's a good idea for RTD to adopt that PEP as policy. I think it's pretty clear and will avoid a lot of problems in the future.

@humitos
Copy link
Member

@humitos humitos commented Dec 5, 2017

I'm closing this one because I think we are following this discussion on #3343

@humitos humitos closed this Dec 5, 2017
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Linked issues

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

5 participants