Re: OF: community packages depending on external packages?

[Juan Pablo Carbajal]

Hi,

I am already feeling the frustration mentioned by Philip.
I want Octave to grow, to capture more user and connect with a fast
growing community of scientific programmers (python, Julia), and I am
more often than not put aback by this kind of discussions.
I want to make Octave attractive for the user, I believe we need to
oil the user-->dev pathway. I do not feel the vibe...
But, hey, that's alright.

What is the meaning of "code under control" in a libre software world?
It seems to me it is an unnatural border (aren't they all unnatural?)

As Philip well remembers, when we created the "categories" it was to
provide a "certificate of usefulness": compatibility with Octave core,
instalability, maintenance, documentation, etc... and license, yes,
yes
Nothing to do with "control", and much less with "code control".
In brief, a user installing a community package should expect no
troubles and be set for an excellent UX. With externals that cannot be
given for granted.

Just take the example of thriving community like pipy, and the julia
index. It is not about control, it is about well defined and
automatized ways of creating packages for adding functionality (the
metadata helps any potential reviewer...mainly users!)
Help the user check what they are getting (website, doc, code,
examples), do not play police!

So I vouch for completely abandoning any sense of "control over the
code", and start thinking about control over the UX of the package
(and eventually of the package manager...ahhh pkg I am looking at you
with disdain).

We are a community of volunteers, no foundation nor company backs us
up. We have to find slim&clever ways of achieving our goals or we will
be stuck in the mud.
And we have to set goals that our community (and man power) can
reach... that starts by reducing bureaucracy.

Cheers