Why should retired branches be deleted ?
Shouldn't they instead be somehow put in read-only state but kept
available for anyone needing them ?
My 2 cents,
Cédric
Le 09/01/2024 à 14:40, Christofer Dutz a écrit :
So, I guess the deletion of the “retired” branches should probably be
done by a PMC member.
I’m happy to help with migrating 2.3.x to git as soon as the old stuff
is buried, if the project wants this to happen.
Chris
*Von: *Christofer Dutz <christofer.d...@c-ware.de>
*Datum: *Montag, 18. Dezember 2023 um 20:25
*An: *dev@cocoon.apache.org <dev@cocoon.apache.org>
*Betreff: *AW: [RESULT][VOTE] Retire 2.1/3.0 and keep 2.x
How about a Mexican style funeral party at Community Over Code? ;-)
Cocoon 2.1 was such a big part of my early IT carreer …
Chris
*Von: *Cédric Damioli <cdami...@apache.org>
*Datum: *Montag, 18. Dezember 2023 um 19:40
*An: *dev@cocoon.apache.org <dev@cocoon.apache.org>
*Betreff: *[RESULT][VOTE] Retire 2.1/3.0 and keep 2.x
The vote is now over and successful with 4 binding +1 and no -1 :
* Francesco Chicchiriccò
* Peter Hunsberger
* Jörg Heinicke
* Cédric Damioli
The PMC is now tasked to do what is needed to effectively retire 2.1/3.0.
As discussed before, it's now time for volunteers to step up to do
whatever is needed to actively maintain a now-refocused Cocoon project
(migration to Git, dependencies upgrades, ...).
Farewell, good old 2.1 :)
Regards,
Cédric
Le 13/12/2023 à 15:00, Cédric Damioli a écrit :
Hi,
Following and according to last weeks' discussions, it seems that
the general consensus would be to retire 2.1 (too old to be
maintained) and 3.0 (too alpha to be maintained), and keep 2.x
around for now.
If I try to summarize what have been said, refocusing on a single
product would give the project a chance to 1) provide a clear
upgrade path to existing 2.1 users and 2) gather renewed interest.
For the still many existing 2.1 users, this would give a clear
signal that it's time to consider other options.
It's now time to formally vote:
[ ] +1 accept (retire and officially stop the maintenance of
2.1/3.0 branches, only keeping 2.x)
[ ] -1 reject (explanation required)
A minimum of 3 binding +1 votes and more binding +1 than binding
-1 are required to pass.
This vote will be open for at least 72 hours.
Best regards,
Cédric
