Move jupyter/nb2kg to jupyter_server and archive repo
kevin-bates opened this issue ยท 4 comments
The jupyter/nb2kg
repository houses the NB2KG server extension used to configure a Notebook server to communicate with a Gateway server (running either Jupyter Kernel Gateway or Jupyter Enterprise Gateway). This server extension has been obsolete since its functionality was introduced into the gateway
package of Notebook versions >= 6.0 and all Jupyter Server versions.
I would like to propose two changes relative to this repository:
- Since the two related Gateway projects are already in the Jupyter Server organization, I think it makes sense to also have the
nb2kg
repository in that same organization and propose it be moved intojupyter_server/nb2kg
. - Because this repository is essentially obsolete, yet continues to get dependabot alerts that it needs its dependency on notebook to be >=
6.4.12
, where it should not be used anyway, I think it best that the repository be archived.
I will hold off on any changes until we've decided if zero, one, or both of these changes should be made.
I think if we're just going to archive it we should leave it in the jupyter
org so it is more discoverable if someone was previously using it.
That makes sense.
Per today's Jupyter Server/Kernels team meeting we felt (within the meeting) that archiving jupyter/nb2kg in-place is probably the best step moving forward (in line with @blink1073's suggestion). I've been asked to poll @jupyter-server/jupyter-server-council regarding the repository's archival. In the meantime, I've commented on an existing issue in the nb2kg repo (which is 2+ years old) indicating the (new) desire to archive the repository.
Polling
Polling is open to all members of the Jupyter Server Council. Anyone is free to comment.
Using the built-in emojis, please indicate approval to archive the nb2kg repository within the jupyter organization using ๐ and its disapproval using ๐. If you'd like to further discuss its future, please feel free to comment separately.
Thank you.
Sorry, this should have been closed with the previous comment.