Conversation
Making clear the repo status per ipfs/boxo#218
|
Thank you for submitting this PR!
Getting other community members to do a review would be great help too on complex PRs (you can ask in the chats/forums). If you are unsure about something, just leave us a comment.
We currently aim to provide initial feedback/triaging within two business days. Please keep an eye on any labelling actions, as these will indicate priorities and status of your contribution. |
|
2023-03-28 conversation with @rvagg : he is going to:
|
|
Updated this PR, making myself the only "CODEOWNER" (let me know if you really want to be in that party, but I'm assuming that nobody else really wants to) and changed the framing in the README to:
...with a list of links including the kubo fork Will merge if I don't get feedback in a couple of days. |
|
Great updates @rvagg! Let's merge. Followups can always be made if needed. |
|
I'm going to merge since @rvagg and I have reviewed and I want to close out ipfs/boxo#218. If there are additions/changes they can get made after. |
Making clear the repo status per ipfs/boxo#218
Note that no "deprecated types" are being added. There is only a general notice that this repo is on a deprecation path and a pointer to the code copy that Kubo uses. Any code that @ipfs/kubo-maintainers own will switch to the Boxo version. A CODEOWNERS was added to clarify who will look at any PRs or do mandatory fixes here (likely in sync with @ipfs/kubo-maintainers since both sides are generally only doing critical changes here.)