# A different approach to solving the abandoned project proble

**URL:** <https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/a-different-approach-to-solving-the-abandoned-project-proble/81227>\
**Category:** Ruby\
**Created:** [January 6, 2007, 7:30pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/a-different-approach-to-solving-the-abandoned-project-proble/81227 "2007-01-06T19:30:26Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Page:** 1

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![pat\_eyler](https://www.ruby-forum.com/letter_avatar_proxy/v4/letter/p/858c86/32.png) [@pat\_eyler](https://www.ruby-forum.com/u/pat_eyler)\
**Post date:** [January 6, 2007, 7:30pm UTC](https://www.ruby-forum.com/t/a-different-approach-to-solving-the-abandoned-project-proble/81227/1 "2007-01-06T19:30:26Z")

</div>

Due to some recent issues around abandoned projects in  
the ruby community, I’ve been thinking about project  
continuation in the context of Free/Open Source software  
hosted on RubyForge (and by extension SourceForge,  
Savannah, etc.). I think I’ve come up with a good appoach  
for protecting the hosting providers from legal issues,  
while still providing a mechanism to let projects continue  
after their owners have disappeared – a directive (like a  
living will or advance health care directive).

I’ve posted an initial cut of my idea at my blog:  
[On Ruby: Abandoned Projects, Bus Proofing, and a Draft Directive](http://on-ruby.blogspot.com/2007/01/abandoned-projects-bus-proofing-and.html)