Re: [Ietf-and-github] Archiving a repository?

[Martin Thomson <[e-mail]>]

We still have the HTTP/2 spec open.  We do get occasional queries, though less than 1 per year.

I don't think that there is any obligation to do anything, but I would say that archival is a good choice for something like ACME if the support requests are becoming a burden.

As to whether we need to say anything, let's put that in the repo for v2.

On Wed, Apr 22, 2020, at 08:58, Salz, Rich wrote:
> Resending with fixed mailing address.
> 
> 
> On 4/21/20, 6:28 PM, "Jacob Hoffman-Andrews" <[e-mail]> wrote:
> 
>     The motivating event is that we recently had an issue filed on the
>     repo that was more of a support request for an ACME implementer. In
>     the long run, an unused repo can attract such requests, as well as
>     spam, and comments that are better directed towards the WG mailing
>     list.
> 
>     On Tue, Apr 21, 2020 at 3:16 PM Salz, Rich <[e-mail]> wrote:
>     >
>     > This came up in ACME, where someone suggested we archive the main 
> ACME repo.  I don’t recall this ever coming up in our docs here.  
> Thoughts?
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Ietf-and-github mailing list
> [e-mail]
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-and-github
>