[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
- Re: OF package maintainers please vote: Scope of OF?, (continued)
Re: OF package maintainers please vote: Scope of OF?, Oliver Heimlich, 2017/01/12
Result of vote for scope of OF, Olaf Till, 2017/01/15
RE: OF package maintainers please vote: Scope of OF?,
JohnD <=