search

ossf / tac

Technical Advisory Council
https://openssf.org
Other
109 stars 60 forks source link

Resolve FRSCA #370

Open presidentoor opened 4 months ago

presidentoor commented 4 months ago

FRSCA appears to operate within the OpenSSF GitHub Enterprise Org (the parent to the github.com/ossf org), they appear to have a Honk logo, and they appear to be a project within which at least dependabot is active as well as one GH user. This is a tracking issue to monitor-to-resolve the status of FRSCA. The specific question has been posed to the SCI WG, which is claimed on the FRSCA repo as the sponsoring WG.

SecurityCRob commented 4 months ago

@hepwori @camaleon2016 please review and comment

hepwori commented 4 months ago

Happy to take a look. What's the actual question referenced by "this specific question has been posed…"?

presidentoor commented 4 months ago

The question as to status. I placed it on the SCI WG agenda document.

hepwori commented 4 months ago

Ack, got it. @mlieberman85 is closest to this and likely has latest on all the answers you seek. I tagged him in the doc.

mlieberman85 commented 4 months ago

This has come up a few times. FRSCA is a project, but I believe it has been archived or should have been.

hepwori commented 3 months ago

@CoS-Harry does this get you what you need? FRSCA should be archived if it's not already :)

sevansdell commented 1 month ago

@afmarcum Is archiving FRSCA an open item still from your perspective?

afmarcum commented 1 month ago

@sevansdell https://github.com/ossf/wg-supply-chain-integrity/issues/73 within the SCI WG repo remains open with @mlieberman85 (maintainer) approving the move to archive the project.

FRSCA does not actively meet, is not actively maintained, and has been removed from OpenSSF materials. The repo and Slack instance have not been not been archived.

I guess the question is whether WG lead approval is required to archive a Technical Initiative if the TI maintainers approve.

Staff can take care of any of admin work required to archive the project, but do not want to overstep the community. If the community is ok to proceed, we can make it happen. (archive repo, Slack channel, submit PR to update SCI WG README, and close both issues) If there are steps that the community prefers to handle directly, please let us know as well.

mlieberman85 commented 1 month ago

Let me check with the one maintainer who still pokes around with FRSCA to just make sure he's aware we plan on archiving it unless he plans to resurrect it.

sevansdell commented 1 month ago

@mlieberman85 what was final decision? Archive?