Re: RFC: Archived projects should explain in their readme why they were archived

On 29/12/25 03:44, Friedrich W. H. Kossebau wrote:
> Am Sonntag, 28. Dezember 2025, 17:58:04 Mitteleuropäische Normalzeit schrieb
> Ben Cooksley:
>> On Mon, Dec 29, 2025 at 4:00 AM Christoph Cullmann<[email protected]>
>>
>> wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> On Sunday, December 28th, 2025 at 13:06, Friedrich W. H. Kossebau <
>>>
>>> [email protected]> wrote:
> <snip content="add custom default branch, with just a README file"/>
>>> I personally would prefer the note added just to the README.
>>>
>>> That has a lot less steps to do and undo on the admin side of GitLab.
>>> No default branch changing and Co.
>>> But that is just my 2c.
>> Default branches also don't propagate across our mirroring logic, so it
>> would have to be changed in two places, and then undone in two places.
> Please see my proposal mainly from consumer perspective, I found those
> setups pretty clear to digest and a positive experience.
>
> Given repos are not archived on masse, doing those extra steps seems doable
> to me now and then. But won't do the actual work, so...
>
> Cheers
> Friedrich

I like the idea of editing the README, placing it at the top with a 
large markdown header "END OF LIFE" and then the reasoning below.

As for branches, I am not sure that I see it having high value.

Regards,

Justin