Removal of old projects from fedorahosted.

[Mike McGrath]

On Tue, 9 Sep 2008, Brett Lentz wrote:

> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: fedora-infrastructure-list-bounces at redhat.com [mailto:fedora-
> > infrastructure-list-bounces at redhat.com] On Behalf Of Robin Norwood
> > Sent: Tuesday, September 09, 2008 6:11 PM
> > To: Fedora Infrastructure
> > Subject: Re: Removal of old projects from fedorahosted.
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 4:35 PM, Mike McGrath <mmcgrath at redhat.com>
> > wrote:
> > > In general from the infrastructure side I'd say we want to keep the
> > > barrier to enter low but the quality high.  Certainly there's
> > projects
> > > that don't need to be updated every 6 months but we can identify
> > those and
> > > deal accordingly.
> >
> > How about 'delisting' instead of deleting?  I'm operating under the
> > assumption that the infrastructure burden of hosting the project isn't
> > the problem you're trying to solve, and that keeping the projects at
> > fedora hosted relevant is.
> >
> > A delisted project simply wouldn't appear on the main fedora hosted
> > list of projects, but would still be available via direct link.  That
> > way, nothing is lost, but the clutter vanishes.
> >
> > You could even have yet another category for projects that are known
> > to be abandoned.
> >
>
> What about using a Sourceforge-style project classification scheme? Allow
> projects to self-identify their status (Alpha, Beta, Stable, Abandoned,
> etc.). That would allow us to craft policies around project updates that are
> more in line with their current development status. It would also allow us
> to filter the main project page according to development status.
>
> For example: maybe alpha projects need to be updated at least every 3-6
> months, but stable projects would only need a minimum of a yearly or
> bi-yearly update to be considered "actively maintained."
>

Why?

	-Mike