Make "releaseDate" key an optional key

[tomootes]

As stated in the following thread. It would be logical to make the releaseDate key optional.

Main reasons that can be coined for this are:

• Some repositories don't use release tags (SemVer). These repo's don't have a logical release date. In practice a lot of repositories will use Continuous Delivery and for these this will be the case.
• It could be argued that it is undesirable if the publiccode.yml becomes a file that has to be updated very often. In the case of developer.overheid.nl we can also fetch the date of the last release via the Gitlab/Github API.

[bfabio]

@tomootes, I agree with both points. Adding to the second: the need to update releaseDate every time results in either not updating it, or it becomes busywork that just annoys the maintainers and makes them roll their eyes at publiccode.yml.

Having it optional makes it available to people who wanna opt-in for that.

[bfabio]

@yaml-9000 minor-change

[yaml-9000]

Thanks for your contribution 🙏

This is now marked as a minor-change proposal to the standard,
this means that old versions of publiccode.yml will still be valid with this change.

Example of minor changes are additions of new keys or making keys optional.

The Chair will eventually pick up this proposal and start the voting procedure using @yaml-9000 vote-start

cc @ruphy @publiccodeyml/steering-committee

_{📄 Voting procedure | 📄 Working Group Charter | 🤖 bot commands}

[tomootes]

@tomootes, I agree with both points. Adding to the second: the need to update releaseDate every time results in either not updating it, or it becomes busywork that just annoys the maintainers and makes them roll their eyes at publiccode.yml.

Having it optional makes it available to people who wanna opt-in for that.

I can't agree more on this one. In addition to this: if a project is using semver the last releasedate can easily be fetched from either Github or Gitlab. If we keep it mandatory this is going to be an extra chore for devs.

[bfabio]

I updated the translations as well and rebased so the preview is successful.

[ruphy]

@yaml-9000 vote-start

[yaml-9000]

Voting is now open on this proposal!

If you are a member of the Steering Committee you can now vote!

The polls will stay open for 14 days, until Wed, 12 Jun 2024 12:33:59 GMT.
At the end of that period the Chair (@publiccodeyml/chair) will mark the voting period as over using @yaml-9000 vote-end

Leave a 👍 (thumbs up) on this comment to accept the proposal or a 👎 (thumbs down) to reject it.

cc @publiccodeyml/steering-committee

_{📄 Voting procedure | 📄 Working Group Charter | 🤖 bot commands}

[bfabio]

@yaml-9000 vote-end

[yaml-9000]

Vote results

The results of the vote are:

Vote	Members	Votes count	Percentage
👍 Approve	@bzg @ruphy	2	100.0%
👎 Reject		0	-

Proposal approved 👍

This proposal is now ready to be merged and get released with a new version of the standard.

cc @publiccodeyml/chair @publiccodeyml/maintainers

_Details

First round: unanimity required

The following users voted (includes non-members of the steering committee):

• bfabio voted 👍

• bzg voted 👍

• ruphy voted 👍

_{📄 Voting procedure | 📄 Working Group Charter | 🤖 bot commands}

[tomootes]

Awesome to see the change has been accepted and is now part of the standard 🙏