On Sat, 2008-05-10 at 11:51 +0100, Ross Paterson wrote:
> It's a special case of a broader problem with non-maintainer uploads
> (i.e. releases), which cause exactly the same problems for other packages
> too. If we had an agreed policy we could advertise and enforce it, but
> we don't. I don't think that mechanized enforcement is the priority;
> having a policy is.
This seems like a good moment to revisit that discussion
http://haskell.org/pipermail/libraries/2008-February/009343.htmlHere's a straw man policy:
We want packages to be uploaded by maintainers or someone the
maintainer/author has delegated that responsibility to.
Packages can be forked at any time but with new names. Transferring
maintenance of a package from one person to another is easy since it's
just delegation.
The tricky case is when the original maintainer/author disappears
without delegating/nominating new maintainers and a new volunteer wants
to pick up the package under the original name. We can borrow a policy
here from some existing organisation, the procedure usually involves
trying to find the maintainer, giving them time to respond, then
announcing that you want to take over maintenance and seeking feedback
and hopefully reaching a consensus.
Duncan
_______________________________________________
Libraries mailing list
Libraries@...
http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries
