Community-topics: Archiving the repo

Hi everyone,
In order to reduce fragmentation, I suggest archiving the community-topics repo as we seem happy with the forum.

I think the discussions will still be available and in addition we could put in every something like:

This repo is about to get archived.
If you want to continue the conversation, please [open]( (category: `Project Discussions`, tag: `community-wg`) with a reference to this issue.
Thanks everyone!

In any case, I don’t think we should vote on this as the discussions already happen on the forum; we can always unarchive the repo if needed.

1 Like

Good idea

  1. Can all issues (apart from #285) be closed
  2. Readme replaced with the text above

Then we can archive


I would like to have a closer look at the open issues. Maybe there’s one or the other that’s worth to keep / move to the forum.

To make this easier, would it be OK if I close the collection_exclusion issues even if 10.0.0 hasn’t been released yet? Those collections have already been removed from 10.0.0a1.

I agree it’s worth going through and closing any issues that are discussion-done so to speak (aka maybe still being implemented but the decisions have been made). Then what remains, go through to see if they should be moved to the forum or just closed because whoever opened them isn’t pushing the discussions along (I’m sure I have a few like that I’ll go close myself).

1 Like

I’ve closed a couple of issues. It would be great if some other people could have a look at the remaining ones. Maybe we can get rid of some more. And then we decide what to do with the rest.


Can we fix a timeline here? Like how much time to wait before archiving? (may be 2 weeks?)

Once we close all issues (either moved to forum or just closed as stale) we can archive as soon as we ensure the repo readme is updated with a pointer to the forum.

1 Like

Discussed in community wg meeting:

  • Add a comment now on all the remaining open issues to ask the OP to close it out if done, or open a new forum topic and then close the issue with a pointer to the new discussion.
  • In about a week, close out all the remaining issues
  • Update the readme and description to say it’s archived and then…archive it.
1 Like

Done. See here for an example.

I’m pretty sure I didn’t overlook any issue, but maybe someone should double check. BTW I’ve skipped Votes are now happening in the Ansible Forum! by design, I didn’t overlook it :wink:

Text in my comments OK for you all? Otherwise please let me know and I’ll change it.


If no objections, I’ll update the README, description, etc. and will archive GitHub - ansible-community/community-topics: Discussions for Ansible Meetings this week (if anyone wants to update stuff, please raise your hand)

1 Like

The README has been updated and the repo archived.
Thanks everyone for the contribution to reducing fragmentation in the community!

Great news :slight_smile:

We have to remember that right now we still have quite a few places in the documentation where the community-topics repository is mentioned, in documents like contributor path, communication, collection requirements, maintainer guidelines, and steering committee docs. We should change these ASAP.

1 Like

@felixfontein FYI I think Update community topics links should fix this in most, if not all, places. Except for maintainers guidelines, but I’ve mentioned this in the PR.

1 Like

Where did we move community-topics/meeting at main · ansible-community/community-topics · GitHub ? We need to update community-topics/meeting/meeting-people.txt at main · ansible-community/community-topics · GitHub to point to the new location, otherwise it’s no longer possible to edit the pinglist for the community meeting.

1 Like

Good point.
Nothing comes to mind as a place for that…
we could re-archive the repo and just disable everything: issues, discussions, …?

You could make it a forum group instead? That makes it self-service to join/leave, and a single REST call will get you the list:

curl | jq '.members[].username'

Just an idea :slight_smile: - of course, chat username might != forum username…

I don’t think chat username == forum username is a good assumption…

How about moving it to GitHub - ansible-community/meetings: Repository for the logic that controls the Ansible community meetings ics ?