Re: [xwiki-devs] [VOTE] Create xwiki-contrib organization on GitHub + move retired platform modules to it (SUMMARY)

On Sep 12, 2011, at 5:50 PM, Sergiu Dumitriu wrote: > On 09/12/2011 03:15 AM, Vincent Massol wrote: >> >> On Sep 12, 2011, at 9:07 AM, Thomas Mortagne wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 9:06 AM, Thomas Mortagne >>> <thomas.mortagne(a)xwiki.com> wrote: >>>> On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 9:00 AM, Vincent Massol<vincent(a)massol.net> wrote: >>>>> >>>>> On Sep 12, 2011, at 8:49 AM, Thomas Mortagne wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Sep 12, 2011 at 8:15 AM, Vincent Massol<vincent(a)massol.net> wrote: >>>>>>> Result: 5 +1, 1 +0 and no -1 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> The vote is passed. I'll try to move them today to https://github.com/xwiki-contrib/sandbox (note that the calendar plugin will be renamed since there's already a xwiki-calendar module in there - not sure what it is, probably a GSOC one). >>>>>> >>>>>> Why in sandbox ? I would say either in their own repository or in retired. >>>>> >>>>> Because: >>>>> 1) own repo means that the project is active and someone is an owner of it. We don't have any owner for these projects ATM. They can be graduated from sandbox when someone takes the ownership and release a new version of them. >>>>> 2) retired mean that these projects are not useful any more and have been replaced by better stuff. I think they're still useful for most of them, at least for: photo album, calendar, exo, alexa, adwords and s5. For workstream it's possible it's not useful anymore with our new message stream. >>>>> >>>>> Said differently retired projects means to people: don't even bother about those, they're dead and not useful any more. While sandbox means: these projects are in uncertain states but can still be useful if someone brings a little love to them. >>>>> >>>>> At least that's how I view the difference. >>>>> >>>>> Of course, these projets use the old plugin technology so we could decide that anything that uses the old plugin tech should be retired. But if we do this we need to decide this for all other projects using plugin tech too, not just these ones and there are lots of plugin projects in their own repos and in sandbox (not mentioning the several plugins that even in platform and that are not retired). We should also consider that some people may be using the photo album or calendar plugins so moving them to retired isn't a good idea IMO. >>>>> >>>>> WDYT? >>>> >>>> Problem whit moving theses project to sandbox is that sandbox does not >>>> fits very well project which already have tags and branches and >>>> several versions already. If a project was graduate from sandbox to >>>> own repository and because not very active anymore I doubt we would >>> >>> s/because/became/ >>> >>>> put it back in sandbox. >> >> Indeed, that's a good point but we need to find a good general solution because this is what we'd be doing when moving stuff to retired too! :) >> >> Maybe we should just have one repo for each project whatever its state (retired, sandbox, etc) and instead indicate its state in a READM file in that module (or maybe in its name with a convention but I don't know how easy/bad it is to rename a repo so a README file sounds easier). > > +1, but we'll leave the existing sandbox and retired in place.

Why? (apart form the fact that it's tedious to move stuff out but this can be automated I guess).