What do you do with GitHub repositories you no longer maintain? [closed]_问答_开发者

Closed. This question is opinion-based. It is not currently accepting answers.

Want to improve this question? Update the question so it can be answered with facts and citations by editing this post.

Closed 7 years ago.

Improve this question 开发者_JAVA技巧

What do you do with GitHub repositories you no longer maintain?

For whatever reason a project is started with a GitHub repository and then sometime later it's abandoned Perhaps it was an experiment that didn't work out. Perhaps you replaced it with a commercial product. Or perhaps you found a similar project to what you were doing and joined their efforts instead.

In the time your repository was alive, it attracted watchers and a few forks.

What do you do with it at that point? Is there a way to nicely indicate that repository is no longer maintained and to either check out the forks or a different project?

I'd do a single commit that removes all the source except for a README file that clearly states that you no longer have interst in the project (also copy the important parts of the README to the last commit log message, use git commit --amend if needed).

The README should explain that all the source code is still available as history. In addition the state of latest code should be described for maturity level: if it was used in production somewhere, it should be said here. If it was only an experiment and you never got it to compile correctly, then that should be said in capital letters. In the latter case, it might make some sense to just remove the code repository, though.

Obviously, the README should also contain the generic description of what your code does, but that should be already in the README.

Also try to put some words in the README that you expect potential users of that code to look for. Try to put those words close to the part that says that you're no longer maintaining the code.

The reasoning for this:

anybody interested in your source will still be able to get it (through history)
anybody trying to blindly merge your HEAD with his will immediately see that it's a bad idea (all source code will be removed and replaced with a README that explains why this happened)

I don't agree with the suggestion that if nobody has forked (and preserved the code), it's worth nothing. Perhaps the only reason somebody else has not taken over is that your project haven't been seen by enough many eyeballs.

If you believe that your code has any value (and I do mean anything above zero), then do not delete it. Just make it clear that the code has been abandoned.

Actually, I think pretty much the nicest thing you can do is to simply delete the repository. That way, the obsolete code doesn't show up in searches, for example.

The whole point of distributed version control is that no single repository is more important than another. If there is enough interest in the project, then one of the people who forked the repository will emerge as the new community leader. And if nobody forked it, then it probably wasn't worth preserving anyway.

I'd make a nice commit in the README file which basically states that this is here for historical reference, look at X Y and Z in order to see where this code went.

I prefix my projects with "deprecated." There are some posts on github's site regarding this, but it seems they won't budge. They want you to put a note in the readme. I'd prefer to put information in a relational database so you can sort on different fields, one of those being if the project is active or not.

I put my deprecated projects up there because there are concepts you can re-use. It is similar to your school work. Hopefully you can learn a lesson or 2 from it.

Walter