meta: note that the repo and process has been archived #64
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM. Not sure people are going to understand that "decided to archive the node-eps repository and process" means "don't use this". (The word I have questions about is "archive". Might be better as "discontinue" for clarity?) But I'm nit-picking. We can always tweak the wording if it actually ever does cause confusion.
|
What is the preferred mechanism for discussing proposals such as #60 moving forward? It would be good to add some actionable steps in the message. 🌷 |
|
Pull requests against master or working in other forks the way we've done with things like http2, Node-ChakraCore, etc |
On https://github.com/nodejs/node directly? |
|
Yes. Or in working repos such as nodejs/http2 |
| @@ -1,5 +1,9 @@ | |||
| # Node.js Enhancement Proposals | |||
|
|
|||
| **NOTE**: The Node.js TSC has [recently](https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/issues/335) | |||
| decided to archive the node-eps repository and process. See https://github.com/nodejs/TSC/issues/335 | |||
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Nit: Linking the same issue twice in two consecutive lines kinda feels redundant.
|
Perhaps we should list all the repos under our roof and explain what they are for, in our main README.md. |
|
Can |
|
Since GitHub offers genuine read-only archiving now, I think this is obsolete. Feel free to re-open or comment if I'm wrong. |
See nodejs/TSC#335
Ping @nodejs/tsc