Draft policy for claiming existing project names. #3314
Conversation
This is prerrt conservative, but it's better than nothing.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Would some specificity around how a renamed project's new name should be selected be helpful? Perhaps simply appending "-abandoned" to the project name.
The ideal would be some metadata that marks projects as abandoned, but a consistent naming scheme should be enough for the time being.
|
Might be useful to start with this: https://www.python.org/dev/peps/pep-0541/#reachability -- as it seems much more specific in regards to timing and contact. |
agjohnson
added
Needed: design decision
|
PEP-541 looks like a good resource. In fact, could we simply defer to its definition of "abandoned" to that PEP and have a policy something like "When a project is abandoned (as defined by PEP-541), a request to rename the project by suffixing "-abandoned" (adding incrementally-higher integers if needed for disambiguation) will be granted. |
|
I think their full policy is quite good and thought out. We should likely adopt the full thing, with some basic changes (eg. |
|
I think it's a good idea for RTD to adopt that PEP as policy. I think it's pretty clear and will avoid a lot of problems in the future. |
|
I'm closing this one because I think we are following this discussion on #3343 |
This is prerrt conservative, but it's better than nothing.