search

json-schema-org / json-hyperschema-spec

A *future* location for the JSON Hyper-Schema I-D sources.
14 stars 4 forks source link

Add org badges #15

Closed Relequestual closed 2 years ago

Relequestual commented 2 years ago

I've been adding "repo status" aka https://repostatus.org badges to our repos, and with this one, I figured others may have opinions, specifically @jdesrosiers =]

Do you feel "Inactive" is OK for now?

Inactive – The project has reached a stable, usable state but is no longer being actively developed; support/maintenance will be provided as time allows.

Although we might think suspended is a better word, the definition isn't as good a fit, IMHO.

Suspended – Initial development has started, but there has not yet been a stable, usable release; work has been stopped for the time being but the author(s) intend on resuming work.

Open to alternative suggestions too.

jdesrosiers commented 2 years ago

Both choices fit and don't fit the situation with hyper-schema development. I think "inactive" is the least bad choice.

However, this repo is empty and doesn't actually have anything to do with hyper-schema development. So, maybe "concept" is more appropriate in this situation.

Concept - Minimal or no implementation has been done yet, or the repository is only intended to be a limited example, demo, or proof-of-concept.

This repo is intended to one day be the place hyper-schema development will happen, but for now, it's an empty placeholder repo.

Relequestual commented 2 years ago

... However, this repo is empty and doesn't actually have anything to do with hyper-schema development. So, maybe "concept" is more appropriate in this situation.

This repo is intended to one day be the place hyper-schema development will happen, but for now, it's an empty placeholder repo.

I hadn't even clocked that fact. Good call. Thanks.

Relequestual commented 2 years ago

this repo is empty and doesn't actually have anything to do with hyper-schema development. - @jdesrosiers

Do you feel splitting into its own repo still makes sense?

When you're able to pick up Hyper Schema work again, do you see a path to transition the spec to this repo?

jdesrosiers commented 2 years ago

Do you feel splitting into its own repo still makes sense?

When you're able to pick up Hyper Schema work again, do you see a path to transition the spec to this repo?

Yes, I think that's the best approach. Hyper-schema is just a vocabulary. It can be developed, maintained, released, etc independently from core/validation.

Julian commented 2 years ago

This seems reasonable to me too, and given it seems the two of you agreed at the end I'll hit the button?

But beyond the badge I don't think it's obvious enough that this repo is empty from the README alone, even after this badge -- I'm going to additionally add that to the sidebar description, where it's a bit more upfront. Obviously if anyone disagrees speak up.

EDIT: (Done, the language I used was "A future location for <existing text>". Comments again welcome if there's an improvement.)