There would be no maintenance, github automagically has a “repo is archived” banner that makes it obvious to all that nothing is going to change about this repo.
It also makes it harder to study caddy <1.0 source and behavior by making each and every person hunt down how to build caddy <1.0 in post 1.0 world forever and ever.
I understand the beauty of open source, but this move to make caddyserver/builds go away is anti-community (and also why GPL style licenses make build scripts part of the required source package, though doesn’t apply here).
Anyway, I’m not sure I’ll be able to change your opinion. I’m very much happy to update my caddy (or do the plain
go build work around). I wanted to express that the removal of caddyserver/builds makes software archaeology harder and goes against “never break the build”, “keep master green”, software reproducibility and git bisect-ability and co. I think you are focused on moving/looking forward and I’m interested in history not being made stale/obsolete/worth-less. (side note: I love living on the edge, I’ll happily run master or .0s or w/e, but I prefer updates to be on my terms/timeline.)