Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

Move "Maintenance Status" into the crates.io UI #2437

Closed
5 tasks
Turbo87 opened this issue Apr 17, 2020 · 3 comments
Closed
5 tasks

Move "Maintenance Status" into the crates.io UI #2437

Turbo87 opened this issue Apr 17, 2020 · 3 comments
Labels
A-backend ⚙️ A-frontend 🐹 C-enhancement ✨ Category: Adding new behavior or a change to the way an existing feature works

Comments

@Turbo87
Copy link
Member

Turbo87 commented Apr 17, 2020

Currently the "Maintenance Status" of a crate/version is hardcoded in the Cargo.toml file. If a crate is no longer maintained it is easy for this status to become outdated though, since a new release would be needed to update the status. We are aiming to simplify setting this status for the maintainer, but keeping it as a field on the crate resource directly in the API, and exposed in the crates.io dashboard for the maintainers to change.

What follows is the rough list of tasks that need to be done to achieve this goal:

  • add the maintenance_status column to the crates database table
    • initialize the column from the current value in the Cargo.toml of the corresponding crate?
  • expose the maintenance_status field in the API
  • support updating the maintenance_status field using the API for crate owners
  • show the maintenance_status value in the crates details page sidebar
  • add a user interface to the dashboard to update the value for each owned crate
@Turbo87 Turbo87 mentioned this issue Apr 17, 2020
Closed
@Turbo87 Turbo87 mentioned this issue Apr 18, 2020
Closed
@Turbo87 Turbo87 mentioned this issue Apr 28, 2020
Closed
@EdorianDark EdorianDark mentioned this issue May 6, 2020
Closed
@Turbo87 Turbo87 added the C-enhancement ✨ Category: Adding new behavior or a change to the way an existing feature works label May 12, 2020
@ehuss ehuss mentioned this issue Sep 23, 2020
Merged
bors added a commit to rust-lang/cargo that referenced this issue Sep 23, 2020
@bors
Auto merge of #8727 - ehuss:badges, r=alexcrichton
4e6fa34 
Remove some badges documentation.

Badges have been removed from crates.io, so this updates the documentation. I don't think Cargo should manage a schema for the different services, and since crates.io isn't using these, I think it is mostly a dead feature. I left the `maintenance` field, because that might still have some meaning in the future.

More details:
* Removal from crates.io: rust-lang/crates.io#2436 rust-lang/crates.io#2440
* Solicited feedback for this change: https://internals.rust-lang.org/t/cargo-badges/12982
* Potential future support of `maintenance` status: rust-lang/crates.io#2437 rust-lang/crates.io#2438 rust-lang/crates.io#2439. It's not clear, if crates.io manages the status in the database, the motivation for putting it in `Cargo.toml` is probably pretty small.
@kennytm kennytm mentioned this issue Jan 8, 2021
Merged
@kornelski
Copy link
Contributor

Maybe the status could be stored in the registry? It could be updated similarly to the yanked field.

@Turbo87 Turbo87 closed this as completed Nov 10, 2021
@kornelski
Copy link
Contributor

What's the resolution of this? Has this feature been abandoned?

@Turbo87
Copy link
Member Author

Turbo87 commented Nov 11, 2021

unfortunately, yes. unless someone steps up and implements it I don't see this moving forward currently.

@epage epage mentioned this issue Mar 12, 2024
Open
@dtolnay dtolnay mentioned this issue Dec 9, 2024
Merged
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Assignees
No one assigned
Labels
A-backend ⚙️ A-frontend 🐹 C-enhancement ✨ Category: Adding new behavior or a change to the way an existing feature works
Projects
None yet
Milestone
No milestone
Development

No branches or pull requests
2 participants
@kornelski @Turbo87