Page tree
Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata


Minutes Link2021 05 06 TSC Meeting Record

Overview of Proposal

This proposal will add a Dormant state to the project lifecycle. Notable differences from existing project lifecycle include:

  1. The addition of the Dormant state
  2. The ability to now move backwards in the project lifecycle (from Dormant back to Incubation)

Formal Proposal(s)

Modify the project lifecycle to include the Dormant state, with the following state changes (changes bolded):

  • Proposal → Incubation
  • Incubation → Graduated or Dormant or Deprecated or End of Life
  • Graduated → Dormant or Deprecated or End of Life
  • Dormant → Incubation or Deprecated or End of Life
  • Deprecated → End of Life

The following description will be added to the Project Lifecycle document.

Dormant: Projects in the Dormant state are ones in which the normal functions are suspended or slowed down for a period of time. The TSC will make the decision as to whether a project will move to the Dormant state upon request. If Dormant projects become re-activated, they will re-enter the Incubation state even if they entered the Dormant state from Graduated state.

Action Items

Reviewed By


  1. Shall we make "Deprecated → End of Life" as the only path forward? i.e. I am curious which project will go to "End of Life" directly.

    1. I added the End of Life directly at the request of Hart Montgomery. His thinking was that there may be times when a group of maintainers wants to completely abandon the project due to some sort of security issue or other major issue that they will not fix. This would be a signal for people to stop using the project.

  2. So, to be clear, each state transition requires an act of the TSC? 

    Should we distinguish who should initiate each transition? Apart from Proposal→Incubation→Graduated being project driven all the other transitions I can come up with sensible reasons why the TSC or the project would initiate it.