As Ted points out, so long as the prior github presence is effectively mothballed I don't see any problem with leaving it up for the foreseeable future.
The main concern of mine and the membership involves podlings making active use of a github repo not under Apache's direct control. This doesn't necessarily mean there's a problem, it just means we should have a look to see if everything is happening according to policy. On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 8:08 PM, Ted Dunning <ted.dunn...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Mon, Nov 2, 2015 at 2:08 PM, Peter Ansell <ansell.pe...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Does Apache use GitHub's "move" repository functionality that adds a > > redirect if the name changes once? If not, is it viable for the > > Commons RDF group to keep their original project (which contains > > directions on how to get to the current repository) until they > > graduate get a permanent location in the /apache/ namespace to > > minimise the number of broken links around the internet to this > > project? > > > > As long as the old project is frozen and has a bold warning that it > represents the past, I doubt that it is a problem that it exists at > graduation. > > > > This project, and others, may be concerned about both their likelihood > > of graduating from the incubator (requiring them to go back to their > > previous Github organisation), and the Apache policy on having two > > renames for their project, which damages their brand if people find > > broken links on the internet. > > > > Whether or not they graduate is largely up to them. Recent non-graduations > have fallen into two categories: > > a) projects which just didn't continue > > b) projects which insisted on things like GPL mandatory dependencies > > Basically, neither kind of project *wanted* to be Apache projects. The > first kind didn't want anything enough to continue (I simplify, of course) > and the second kind didn't want to follow through on the Apache IP > requirements. > > Pretty much any project that continues to be vital, produces clean Apache > style releases, is willing to be careful about where their code comes from > and be open, friendly and inclusive can become an Apache project. > > Maybe this project needs a long talk with somebody who has been around the > circuit a few times. On the other hand, any project that has the mentors > that Commons RDF has should have ready access to Apache expertise. > > Looking at the email archives just now, it looks to me like commons RDF is > finding it difficult to build a community and maintain any serious > momentum. Seeing only a few emails or commits for months on end raises red > flags to me. A project that peters out at Apache is likely to have petered > out anyway, however, so I don't see much for the original folks to worry > about. >
