No longer developing PaperWM. Looking for new maintainers moving forward.

[jtaala]

Evening all,

Please see #945 for some history here.

Unfortunately, I haven't found anyone to take over PaperWM development and/or continue to maintain it.

As such, I'm planning on archiving this repo in a month or so.

Please reach out if you're keen to take over ownership of PaperWM!

[jtaala]

@smichel17, @Thesola10 - let me know if you (or anyone you know) might be keen to take over PaperWM development (or at least ownership of this repo).

[capfredf]

I just came across the awesome extension. I am still playing with it. Not sure if I am capable of maintaining it and developing features for now. If no body is willing to step in, I can take it over (at least the ownership of this repo)

[smichel17]

My situation is pretty similar to when @jtaala joined as maintainer:

• I don't have much time/inclination to be a maintainer myself (I lack the knowledge of gnome internals and don't want to invest the time to learn).
  • There's a small chance I'll have more bandwidth in around 6 months. That would probably look like doing code reviews. But that's a while off and I don't know exactly how things will go, so don't count on it :)
• I am willing to help steward a new maintainer joining. Which essentially means being a trustworthy person to manage permissions, so if we add a new maintainer and it turns into an xz situation, I can regain control of the repo.

[smichel17]

Just noticed this part.

As such, I'm planning on archiving this repo in a month or so.

I think PaperWM works well enough for most people who use it today, so new maintainers are (only) going to show up when someone using the app upgrades to an unsupported gnome version and finds PaperWM hasn't been upgraded. So I'd rather leave the repo open until that happens. If nobody shows up to take over once there's a gnome version with breaking changes, then we can archive it, but I'd vote to wait until then. The repo was open with minimal maintenance for a full year before you took over.

[jtaala]

Thanks @smichel17 - but we do need an admin or someone to take control of the repo. My situation is that I won't be available to administer/control/maintain PaperWM. Without an admin (who can add/remove contributors etc.) I'd want to archive this project (at least until a new repo owner/admin can be found).

Essentially, we at least need a new repo admin, who could:

• maintain the repo,
• add/remove contributors,
• respond to bug/feature requests/ questions etc.,
• review/accept PRs (and merge changes into release),
• eventually also give someone else these admin perms;

I'll also need to migrate the current extensions.gnome.org account to this new person so that new version of PaperWM can be deployed.

[jtaala]

• Which essentially means being a trustworthy person to manage permissions, so if we add a new maintainer and it turns into an xz situation, I can regain control of the repo.

Indeed, this person should be very familiar with the project, trustworthy, etc.

Let me know if you'd be open to become a repo admin here (essentially to be able to review/accept PRs, add/remove contributors, maintain repo perms etc.).

Sounds like you're situation might be similar to mine though.

[jtaala]

Just noticed this part.

As such, I'm planning on archiving this repo in a month or so.

I think PaperWM works well enough for most people who use it today, so new maintainers are (only) going to show up when someone using the app upgrades to an unsupported gnome version and finds PaperWM hasn't been upgraded. So I'd rather leave the repo open until that happens. If nobody shows up to take over once there's a gnome version with breaking changes, then we can archive it, but I'd vote to wait until then. The repo was open with minimal maintenance for years before you took over.

Sorry @smichel17!

I thought I was the only admin left (I hadn't seen you in a long time so didn't recognise the name!).

Indeed, you are also an admin (as far as I can see). In this case - if you're around and can do basic repo maintenance and respond to questions, add new contributors etc. we could keep it open until breaking changes (i.e. I'd be happy to not archive the project).

My concerns here though are that without someone to respond to new questions/bugs/feature requests, or PRs etc. we'll essentially be in an unmaintained state. And archiving the project - until someone that can be more involved is more available, I would have thought would be preferable (otherwise, questions, PRs etc. would go unanswered etc.) - and would likely remain as such.

Users could always fork, or continue to use the last release etc. (even if archived).

[smichel17]

I hadn't seen you in a long time so didn't recognise the name

Yeah, the history is in #407. I haven't been as active in FLOSS as I would like the past 3 years, since I got my current job, but that will hopefully change in around 6 months.

I have access to the organization, not just the repo, so another repo admin can't remove my access; only @hedning or @olejorgenb can do that. That makes it safe for me to give out to someone else without worrying too much about a takeover from a bad actor (e.g. SEO spammer).

I think it's OK if nobody responds to questions/bugs/feature requests. For PRs.. well, if we get enough of those, maybe the people sending them can do some review, too -- they are the potential future maintainers :). We could even have a policy like: if you want your PR merged, you need to review someone else's PR first.

Forking is a lot more effort than taking over maintainership, because you lose the community; So you also need to do the work of telling everybody about the fork (competing with any other forks, and folks who are just staying with the archived repo).

I think it's fine for you to just step back; you can even remove yourself as admin if you don't want to get pinged. I'll make sure it's possible for someone else to step up as a new maintainer if they show interest.