Backup maintainer [Re: 'temporary' package]

[Alois Cochard]

Oh I see what you mean now Andreas, thanks for the detailed explanation!

I like your idea of "ladder" with packages climbing it, nice way to enforce
rule only when really necessary.


On 9 May 2014 15:24, Andreas Abel <andreas.abel at ifi.lmu.de> wrote:

> Well, not all packages uploaded to hackage are "libraries" in the sense
> that other packages rely on them.  There are tons of applications, and also
> things intended to be general purpose libraries that never get enough users.
>
> But once your package is used by enough others that rely on it, you need a
> backup maintainer.
>
> One could think of a "ladder" where packages acquire reputation/status,
> and from a certain point on one needs a backup maintainer.
>
> On 09.05.2014 15:00, Alois Cochard wrote:
>
>> Does it mean you prefer not having a package in hackage than having it
>> without a backup maintainer?
>>
>> Just think about all the packages that would not have reached hackage
>> with a rule like that...
>>
>>
>> On 7 May 2014 20:59, Andreas Abel <andreas.abel at ifi.lmu.de
>> <mailto:andreas.abel at ifi.lmu.de>> wrote:
>>
>>     On 07.05.2014 14:49, Roman Cheplyaka wrote:
>>
>>         Having backup maintainers is the answer.
>>         http://ro-che.info/articles/__2014-02-08-my-haskell-will.__html
>>         <http://ro-che.info/articles/2014-02-08-my-haskell-will.html>
>>
>>
>>     Yes!  +1
>>
>>     hackage should require a backup maintainer for every library package
>>     upload.
>>
>>
>>             On May 7, 2014 8:36 AM, "Roman Cheplyaka" <roma at ro-che.info
>>             <mailto:roma at ro-che.info>> wrote:
>>
>>                 No. In my opinion, there's no good reason why a package
>>                 should remain
>>                 broken for
>>                 more than a day, given that there are people who has
>>                 found, reported, and
>>                 fixed
>>                 the issue. All the actual work is done, now someone just
>>                 has to push a
>>                 button.
>>
>>                 * Oliver Charles <ollie at ocharles.org.uk
>>                 <mailto:ollie at ocharles.org.uk>> [2014-05-07
>> 13:29:40+0100]
>>
>>                     Isn't a 4 day turn around on a pull request a little
>>                     hasty?
>>
>>                     - ocharles
>>
>>
>>                     On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 8:50 AM, Roman Cheplyaka
>>                     <roma at ro-che.info <mailto:roma at ro-che.info>>
>>
>>                 wrote:
>>
>>
>>                         Hi Max,
>>
>>                         are you still maintaining the 'temporary' package?
>>                         There's a breakage waiting to be fixed (with a
>>                         patch):
>>                         https://github.com/__
>> batterseapower/temporary/pull/__12
>>                         <https://github.com/
>> batterseapower/temporary/pull/12>
>>
>>                         If I don't hear from you in two days, I'll
>>                         request maintainership
>>
>>                 and/or
>>
>>                         fork the package.
>>
>>
>>
> --
> Andreas Abel  <><      Du bist der geliebte Mensch.
>
> Department of Computer Science and Engineering
> Chalmers and Gothenburg University, Sweden
>
> andreas.abel at gu.se
> http://www2.tcs.ifi.lmu.de/~abel/
>



-- 
*Alois Cochard*
http://aloiscochard.blogspot.com
http://twitter.com/aloiscochard
http://github.com/aloiscochard
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.haskell.org/pipermail/libraries/attachments/20140509/254bd89c/attachment.html>