[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Removal of old projects from fedorahosted.



On Tue, 2008-09-09 at 21:02 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote:
> On Tue, 9 Sep 2008, Robin Norwood wrote:
> 
> > On Tue, Sep 9, 2008 at 9:34 PM, Mike McGrath <mmcgrath redhat com> wrote:
> > > Nope, the terms of use are already pretty clear.  And no one has provided
> > > a compelling reason to keep these projects around, just lots of
> > > suggestions on how to keep them around.  Deleted is what we want, not
> > > delisted or saved forever or anything like that.  We're not going to
> > > commit any resources to a project that choosed not to use this free
> > > service.
> >
> > Well, because sooner or later, you'll delete a project that someone
> > didn't want deleted, and they'll be ticked off.  Maybe they'll open a
> > ticket and convince the infra. team to restore the data from a backup,
> > or maybe they'll just be ticked off and rant about how much Fedora
> > sucks for deleting this thing they didn't want deleted.
> >
> 
> I'm fine with that.  Its well documented.  and its not like we're going to
> rm -rf the thing.  We'll keep it around for a while but no promises.
> 
> > Again, I'm assuming the per-project maintenence cost is near zero (ie,
> > a little bit of disk space).  If not, then maybe I could see a case
> > for automatically deleting old projects.
> >
> 
> Ah, thats an incorrect assumption.

Is there a way to balance deactivating the greater project needs with
the value of the source code as a useful historical artifact?  In other
words, if we reduced (for example) an active git-based project to just
the .git stuff, and made it available for download only, then the cost
really is just disk space, right?

I wouldn't want to see Infrastructure roped into committing lots of
resources to carry a ton of dead projects.  If there's a significant
per-project maintenance cost, even if it just adds up to something
significant over hundreds of projects, the work has to be justified
somehow.  Is there a way to keep the source around but not induce the
maintenance cost?  Am I being naive about this?

-- 
Paul W. Frields
  gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233  5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
  http://paul.frields.org/   -  -   http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
  irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]