remove ravenblackx from deprecated cache ownership

[ravenblackx]

Commit Message: remove ravenblackx from deprecated cache ownership
Additional Description: With #41148 introducing a new cache filter implementation that expects to be maintained, it no longer makes sense to accept PRs touching the deprecated filter (other than to more firmly deprecate it or move it to contrib where it doesn't need a maintainer). Giving it the UNOWNED property is a gentle step towards making this clearer, and signifying my intent to not review any PRs that aim to "upkeep" the deprecated cache filter.

[adisuissa]

Should the cache filter be moved to contrib?
cc @envoyproxy/envoy-maintainers

[ravenblackx]

Should the cache filter be moved to contrib?

My understanding is contrib things still need to have a volunteer maintainer and owner or they get deleted, so I don't think the effort required to move it would be worth anything - an unmaintained non-contrib and an unmaintained contrib both are supposed to be on a track to deletion, so it might as well be on that track in-place.

(Unless what you're suggesting is that being in contrib would allow it to have a tainted API, and therefore would unblock #37990 - in that case that seems like a good option to me.)

[adisuissa]

My understanding is contrib things still need to have a volunteer maintainer and owner or they get deleted, so I don't think the effort required to move it would be worth anything - an unmaintained non-contrib and an unmaintained contrib both are supposed to be on a track to deletion, so it might as well be on that track in-place.

I thought that contrib doesn't require an Envoy maintainer, but just a sponsor that uses the filter (https://github.com/envoyproxy/envoy/blob/main/EXTENSION_POLICY.md#contrib-extensions).
I'm not sure who is using this filter.

[ravenblackx]

I thought that contrib doesn't require an Envoy maintainer, but just a sponsor that uses the filter (https://github.com/envoyproxy/envoy/blob/main/EXTENSION_POLICY.md#contrib-extensions). I'm not sure who is using this filter.

Just different wording, I mean there's no sponsor either for this filter as far as I know, so it's not getting any more permitted by being moved into contrib. Unless the idea is that if it's moved into contrib it will be allowed to be implemented the way that works, in which case we use that version [currently as a gigantic patch], and I would be the sponsor.

[ravenblackx]

(But to me it seems extremely bizarre for it to be okay to be like "okay anyone using the cache now has to change a bunch of stuff so that they're using a version that lives in contrib now" while at the same time saying it's not okay to at some point in the future deprecate a field from the config API because that might be disruptive.)

[ggreenway]

I think if the current cache filter is known to be too broken to really work, and there isn't a fix planned, it makes more sense to delete it than to move it to contrib.

[github-actions]

This pull request has been automatically marked as stale because it has not had activity in the last 30 days. It will be closed in 7 days if no further activity occurs. Please feel free to give a status update now, ping for review, or re-open when it's ready. Thank you for your contributions!

[ravenblackx]

/retest