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
Archiving Process for CNCF Discussion #170
Conversation
LGTM, let's :) |
process/archiving.md
Outdated
@@ -0,0 +1,35 @@ | |||
# CNCF Project Archiving Process v1.0 | |||
|
|||
Open source projects have a lifecycle and there are times that projects become inactive due to a variety of reasons. There are also cases where a project may no longer want to be supported by the TOC. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
s/TOC/CNCF/ ?
Is there a difference here? Can the TOC no longer recommend it but the CNCF continue to be ok with it?
I'm thinking this should CNCF not TOC since the TOC is just acting on behalf of the CNCF.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
probably better to qualify project
-> project under the governance of the TOC
?
since there are repositories at CNCF that do not come under the TOC (example - https://github.com/cncf/cnf-testbed)
process/archiving.md
Outdated
|
||
* CNCF will no longer provide any support for the project, via service desk | ||
* CNCF will list archived projects online | ||
* Archived CNCF projects will be transferred to the Linux Foundation for neutral holding and support |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
code and binaries/releases right?
Simplify archival criteria Project maintainers should be informed when the proposal is made Clarifications and typos
And will continue to host tradmarks and domain names
Overall this proposal SGTM to me. |
The proposal looks good to me. |
Closes #148