octave-maintainers
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: OF package maintainers please vote: Scope of OF?


From: JohnD
Subject: RE: OF package maintainers please vote: Scope of OF?
Date: Fri, 13 Jan 2017 10:33:53 -0500

> Message: 1
> Date: Tue, 10 Jan 2017 13:51:28 +0100
> From: Olaf Till <address@hidden>
> To: "address@hidden" <address@hidden>
> Subject: OF package maintainers please vote: Scope of OF?
> Message-ID: <address@hidden>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
> 
> Dear all,
> 
> there is no new person authorized to initialize a vote on Octave Forge,
but
> maybe you see the need for it, although I'm not the right person to start
it.
> 
> After a controversial discussion in the thread "...looking for a new
leader..."
> and a similarly controversial off-list discussion initalized by Julien
with Oliver
> and me, I think the first principal issue to decide on is the following:
> 
> There are two different main concepts proposed for OF:
> 
> 1. Simply maintain a list of packages, hosted elsewhere.
> 
> 2. Continue to execercise some central control onto contained
>    packages, making the package maintainers potentially bound to some
>    majority- or admin-decisions.
> 
> For 2., two subvariants have been proposed:
> 
> 2.1. In addition to the controled packages, maintain a list of
>      independent packages, checked only for some formal structural
>      conformance, which are primarily hosted elsewhere. OF contains
>      'copies' of the external repositories, synchronized at least at
>      release time. The package maintainer has exclusive control, if OF
>      decides to fork the package, a different package name must be
>      used.
> 
> 2.2. Only the controled packages are contained in OF.
> 
> Of course, each choice requires that some person(s) is(are) willing to
> maintain OF. If this is the case can only be seen later.
> 
> I think the OF package maintainers should decide on this. If you vote,
please
> indicate which OF package(s) you maintain.
> 
> Please indicate if you prefer 1. or 2..
> 
> In case of 2., please indicate if you prefer 2.1. or 2.2.
> 
> 
> Feel free to give arguments for a choice (I'll do it also in my vote), but
please
> keep your vote at a prominent position in your e-mail. You can also give
> arguments in a sparate e-mail before you vote, or if you don't vote, or if
you
> aren't a maintainer at all. In fact it could be advisable to first read
some
> arguments and to vote afterwards.
> 
> I hope this works... if it works, I think one week is enough for vote
collection.
> That is all very informal...
> 
> Olaf
> 

Maintainer for windows and zeromq package

2.1

I can also volunteer my help on OF if neede




reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]