first draft private storage template #652

gedankenstuecke commented 2025年03月19日 18:33:18 +01:00

Would close #651

I wasn't able to copy the markdown bits 1:1, mainly as the issue templates according to the forgejo docs do not seem to be able to nest information as suggested in them. But hopefully these edits cover the spirit of the markdown file :-)

And of course as always happy for feedback, suggested edits etc 🙂

Would close #651 I wasn't able to copy the markdown bits 1:1, mainly as the issue templates according to the forgejo docs do not seem to be able to nest information as suggested in them. But hopefully these edits cover the spirit of the markdown file :-) And of course as always happy for feedback, suggested edits etc 🙂

martins-avots commented 2025年03月19日 19:01:04 +01:00

@gedankenstuecke I guess that the field The total size of storage needed is should be a required one.
This probably would reduce the number of surprises, when someone requires a lot of space.

The option My private work is Free Software, too, and everyone with access to it can publish it as covered by the License seems to be missing.

@gedankenstuecke I guess that the field ` The total size of storage needed is` should be a required one. This probably would reduce the number of surprises, when someone requires a lot of space. The option `My private work is Free Software, too, and everyone with access to it can publish it as covered by the License` seems to be missing.

gedankenstuecke commented 2025年03月19日 19:06:26 +01:00

great point, made the size required, @martins-avots!

For the free license-bit after the expiration: I did leave that one out intentionally, as it feels like that duplicates the "Publish my private work to the public", as the description for that one reads

Applies to timespans only: What shall we do when the period passes AND there was no request for extending the period AND we do not receive a reply to our notification within 30 days AND the content is available under a libre License

So, the libre license is already expected somehow? So it feels like that one isn't really another drop-down option for what should happen to the repo in case that happens but maybe more of a general requirement?I think @n0toose might be able to help out clarifying what the options for that one should be to him :-)

great point, made the size required, @martins-avots! For the free license-bit after the expiration: I did leave that one out intentionally, as it feels like that duplicates the "Publish my private work to the public", as the description for that one reads > Applies to timespans only: What shall we do when the period passes AND there was no request for extending the period AND we do not receive a reply to our notification within 30 days AND the content is available under a libre License So, the libre license is already expected somehow? So it feels like that one isn't really another drop-down option for what should happen to the repo in case that happens but maybe more of a general requirement?I think @n0toose might be able to help out clarifying what the options for that one should be to him :-)

n0toose commented 2025年03月20日 14:23:16 +01:00

So, the libre license is already expected somehow?

What shall we do when the period passes AND there was no request for extending the period AND we do not receive a reply to our notification within 30 days AND the content is available under a libre License

I think it's about "if ALL conditions are true".

> So, the libre license is already expected somehow? > What shall we do when the period passes AND there was no request for extending the period AND we do not receive a reply to our notification within 30 days AND the content is available under a libre License I think it's about "if ALL conditions are true".

gedankenstuecke commented 2025年03月20日 14:38:44 +01:00

Gotcha, but what happens if not all conditions are met? Will we default to delete in that case? If that's the case we need to highlight that somewhere as the fallback i think :)

Gotcha, but what happens if not all conditions are met? Will we default to delete in that case? If that's the case we need to highlight that somewhere as the fallback i think :)

n0toose commented 2025年03月20日 14:43:09 +01:00

Will we default to delete in that case? If that's the case we need to highlight that somewhere as the fallback i think :)

Me too, but that's something only Otto can clarify unfortunately, I'd say "leave it as is and I'll figure it out with him if he becomes more available to clarify the policy at a later point".

> Will we default to delete in that case? If that's the case we need to highlight that somewhere as the fallback i think :) Me too, but that's something only Otto can clarify unfortunately, I'd say "leave it as is and I'll figure it out with him if he becomes more available to clarify the policy at a later point".

gedankenstuecke commented 2025年03月20日 14:44:54 +01:00

Sounds good, thanks!

Sounds good, thanks!

This pull request can be merged automatically.

You are not authorized to merge this pull request.