Organization repositories maintenance

[fcollonval]

We have lots of repositories in the organization that did not see much activities for a while. It will be good to decide what to do with them.

Here is a list of the repositories that we should look at:

• https://github.com/jupyterlab/jupyterlab-google-drive -> broken as Google change its auth API
• https://github.com/jupyterlab/jupyterlab-mp4 -> included now in https://github.com/jupyterlab/extension-examples/tree/main/mimerenderer
• https://github.com/jupyterlab/runall-extension - last commit in 2018
• https://github.com/jupyterlab/jupyterlab-monaco - last commit in 2018; in Lab 4 we bless CodeMirror 6
• https://github.com/jupyterlab/jupyterlab-commenting
• https://github.com/jupyterlab/jupyterlab-data-explorer
• https://github.com/jupyterlab/jupyterlab-metadata-service
• https://github.com/jupyterlab/jupyterlab-shortcutui
• https://github.com/jupyterlab/jupyterlab_xkcd - last commit in 2019 seems redundant with the apod tuto
• https://github.com/jupyterlab/eslint-plugin-jinja - last commit in 2017
• https://github.com/jupyterlab/jupyterlab-media - last commit in 2018

It has been decided at the weekly call of June 21st to leave a week for people to build an opinion on those projects and decide of their fate at the next call (June 28th).

---

Comments from the weekly meeting:

• JupyterLab Google Drive:
  • Darian: let's archive this
• JupyterLab mp4:
  • Jeremy: this one could be added to core, there is a "good first issue" about this:
    - Move to JupyterLab core? jupyterlab-mp4#7
    - Understand audio and video formats the browser can handle jupyterlab#3860

[jtpio]

cc @jupyterlab/jupyterlab-council since not everybody in the council can attend the weekly calls

[ivanov]

I support archiving all of these. It's pretty easy to un-archive should the need arise, see

It would be nice to update the README in each o these referring back to this team compass issue that it is being archived due to inactivity.

[fcollonval]

The follow up on this discussed at the weekly meeting is the following action:

[Fred] I'll open an issue on those repositories to notify subscribers that may be willing to take over the maintenance with a two weeks notice. After this 2 weeks, if no reaction to the issue, I will update the project README to add a notice of archiving the code linking to the team-compass issue. And then archive the projects.

[krassowski]

Just a note: user experience suffers if organization has lots of archived repositories. Having a second organization like https://github.com/jupyter-attic (or just moving some of those repositories over there) may be better than just archiving for some (not necessarilly all) of the repos.

[ivanov]

Just a note: user experience suffers if organization has lots of archived repositories

Hi @krassowski, can you be more specific about the way in which user experience suffers when there are lots of archived repositories?

[echarles]

Hi @krassowski, can you be more specific about the way in which user experience suffers when there are lots of archived repositories?

I don't think one answer is better than the other as this is very linked to our you perceive the repos in orgs (like files in folders). On my side, I am in favor to moving all archived repos to jupyter-attic (moving to a new jupyterlab-attic would be another alternative a bit overkill imho), just because I like working on a clean naked desktop with as less items as possible.

[krassowski]

Some specific scenarios I experienced:

• a user wants to explore extensions for JupyterLab. Because they trust JupyterLab team to maintain high quality extensions they go to https://github.com/jupyterlab and click through pages of repositories; however they quickly get annoyed by pages of archived repositories (this is not the state of our org yet, but it does happen elsewhere).
• a user wants to find an answer for how to do X, e.g. add a new shortcut in UI (which was merged into the core) they use a search engine and find an issue in jupyterlab-shortcutui which appears to answer their question. Because search engines (e.g. Google) do not display "Public archive" over links and show jupyterlab/jupyterlab-shortcutui the user wastes time on potentially outdated solution. If the link said "jupyter-attic/jupyterlab-shortcutui" they would have another cue about this possibly not being what they are looking for
• I as a developer want to find a repository in our organization with a name which I have forgotten. Again, I have pages to go through many of which are irrelevant
• I as a developer know about a deprecated piece of code I want to remove, or a security vulnerability. I want to use GitHub (powerful) search function to find repositories which may need changes. I restrict my search to jupyterlab repository but still find many false positives (archived code); GitHub shows no indication of repo being archived in search
  • similarly, extension developer trying to find usages of a token or class who may find it more difficult to tell which repositories are archived or not
    

[krassowski]

On the other hand we should probably prominently link to wherever we would decide to move the archived repos so that they are still discoverable.

[ellisonbg]

Note, we created the attic org before GitHub implemented the repo-level archive ability. I don't think we would have done that is GitHub had repo-level archives, as it requires a lot more work to do cross-org transfers across Jupyter.

…

On Sat, Jul 1, 2023 at 1:00 AM Michał Krassowski ***@***.***> wrote: On the other hand we should probably prominently link to wherever we would decide to move the archived repos so that they are still discoverable. — Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub <#200 (comment)>, or unsubscribe <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAAGXUFETQULD6W6RKIOM5DXN7KIFANCNFSM6AAAAAAZPACDOI> . You are receiving this because you are on a team that was mentioned.Message ID: ***@***.***>

-- Brian E. Granger Senior Principal Technologist, AWS AI/ML ***@***.***) On Leave - Professor of Physics and Data Science, Cal Poly @ellisonbg on GitHub

[ellisonbg]

Oh, please don't archive the commenting extension though, we plan on starting to work on that again this year.

…

On Wed, Jul 5, 2023 at 3:12 PM Brian Granger ***@***.***> wrote: Note, we created the attic org before GitHub implemented the repo-level archive ability. I don't think we would have done that is GitHub had repo-level archives, as it requires a lot more work to do cross-org transfers across Jupyter. On Sat, Jul 1, 2023 at 1:00 AM Michał Krassowski ***@***.***> wrote: > On the other hand we should probably prominently link to wherever we > would decide to move the archived repos so that they are still discoverable. > > — > Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub > <#200 (comment)>, > or unsubscribe > <https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAAGXUFETQULD6W6RKIOM5DXN7KIFANCNFSM6AAAAAAZPACDOI> > . > You are receiving this because you are on a team that was mentioned.Message > ID: ***@***.***> > -- Brian E. Granger Senior Principal Technologist, AWS AI/ML ***@***.***) On Leave - Professor of Physics and Data Science, Cal Poly @ellisonbg on GitHub

-- Brian E. Granger Senior Principal Technologist, AWS AI/ML ***@***.***) On Leave - Professor of Physics and Data Science, Cal Poly @ellisonbg on GitHub

[fcollonval]

@krassowski as mentioned by @ellisonbg doing cross org transfer is adding some complexity; especially if at a later stage someone wants to revive a repository.

What do you think of renaming the project by prefixing them with archived as part of the archive process? GitHub is good at redirecting and as for org transfer the old URLs will still work but the hopefully the link will give a hint to the reader about the repo status.

[krassowski]

Prefixing them would only address one of the points. I think it is safe to proceed with archiving and we can rename or move them later if there is a need and wider consensus.

[jtpio]

Maybe it could be worth mentioning some of the top contributors in each of the repos explicitly in these issues, as they might not be actively watching the repository and getting notifications when new issues are opened.

[fcollonval]

Closing this as the repositories maintenance has been done.