Remove reference to gautamkrishnar/keepalive-workflow that violates GitHub ToS#781
Merged
henryiii merged 1 commit intoscientific-python:mainfrom Apr 22, 2026
Conversation
henryiii
approved these changes
Apr 22, 2026
This file contains hidden or bidirectional Unicode text that may be interpreted or compiled differently than what appears below. To review, open the file in an editor that reveals hidden Unicode characters.
Learn more about bidirectional Unicode characters
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
2 participants
Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.This suggestion is invalid because no changes were made to the code.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is closed.Suggestions cannot be applied while viewing a subset of changes.Only one suggestion per line can be applied in a batch.Add this suggestion to a batch that can be applied as a single commit.Applying suggestions on deleted lines is not supported.You must change the existing code in this line in order to create a valid suggestion.Outdated suggestions cannot be applied.This suggestion has been applied or marked resolved.Suggestions cannot be applied from pending reviews.Suggestions cannot be applied on multi-line comments.Suggestions cannot be applied while the pull request is queued to merge.Suggestion cannot be applied right now. Please check back later.
Removes a reference to https://github.com/gautamkrishnar/keepalive-workflow, because the repository has been disabled as a result of violating the GitHub ToS. See the conversation at nanos/FediFetcher#198, specifically the attachment at nanos/FediFetcher#198 (comment), which I believe was sent to the author after a support request.
Surprisingly, it still shows up on the marketplace at https://github.com/marketplace/actions/keepalive-workflow
There seem to be a few workarounds that are not very popular and thus GitHub has not quite managed to run into yet:
However, I'd suggest not including anything here, as those who want to find such a solution for their repository might just be able to do so through a search engine hit, like I was able to above. Usage of such actions carries a risk of such altercations by GitHub, which I don't think we should invite for our users by offering any advice – they are free to do this on their own accord.
📚 Documentation preview 📚: https://scientific-python-cookie--781.org.readthedocs.build/