Re: Octave Forge -- Looking for a new leader

[PhilipNienhuis]

Oliver Heimlich wrote
> On 02.01.2017 12:58, Philip Nienhuis wrote:
>> Olaf Till wrote:
>>> On Sun, Jan 01, 2017 at 03:27:31PM -0800, PhilipNienhuis wrote:
>>>> Sebastian Schöps wrote
>>>>>
>>>>> Olaf Till-2 wrote
>>>>>> On Sat, Dec 31, 2016 at 01:40:05AM -0800, Sebastian Schöps wrote:
> 
> ... 
> <snip long disussion>
>  ...
> 
> I have compiled a list of roles and responsibilities in the wiki, which
> should reflect the current state (where Carnë represents the two roles
> “package manager” and “leader”).  Please add things which I might have
> overlooked.
> 
> http://wiki.octave.org/Octave-Forge

Very good! Thank you for that.

I've read up on it and have some comments. Before editing the wiki I think
it is better to discuss the contents in the maintainers list. Shall I start
a new thread for that?


> I believe that the time consuming task of processing the release tickets
> can easily be distributed among several people if the quality criteria
> for package releases can be agreed upon.  I can help with that task
> myself (won't be available 24/7, but you can count on my support).
> 
>> Revisiting Sebastian's valid point about correctness of content, that
>> looks to be a debatable responsibility even for package maintainers, let
>> alone OF leader(s). Do package maintainers really need to know all
>> nitty-gritty of functions contained in the package?
>> Taking the io package as example, it contains contributed and inherited
>> functions dealing with e.g., json and pch formats I am completely
>> unfamiliar with. I could only check help texts and conspicuous coding
>> style issues etc. but not what the functions really do.
> 
> IMHO, in the long run we have to push more tasks from the Forge team to
> the package maintainers and from the package maintainers to authors and
> contributors.  Otherwise Octave Forge cannot scale with more and more
> packages. For example:
>  * package maintainers should be able to actually make the release on
> their own

Oh yes, I agree.

I think it would be useful to have "stable" and "development" releases side
by side to enable users to test packages.
For the io package I sometimes sent beta releases to interested volunteers 
but that was usually only a 1 or 2 person test team. Larger audiences may
help to get more feedback.


>  * the forge team can add it to the list, if quality criteria match
> 
>> Question then is: *who* is responsible at all for correctness of
>> functions in OF packages?
> 
> ## This program is distributed in the hope that it will be useful,
> ## but WITHOUT ANY WARRANTY; without even the implied warranty of
> ## MERCHANTABILITY or FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR PURPOSE.  See the
> ## GNU General Public License for more details.
> 
> If the package maintainer gets to know about actual errors, she should
> work towards fixing it (not necessarily herself).  Eventually she may
> decide to remove a problematic function from a package.

Yep, formally no one is.

Philip



--
View this message in context: 
http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/Octave-Forge-Looking-for-a-new-leader-tp4681121p4681285.html
Sent from the Octave - Maintainers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.