Hi Gabor,
On Mon, Jan 19, 2009 at 11:30:53PM +0100, Gabor Pali
I'm started some month ago, introducing the possibility to compile the developer documentation for every haskell ports with ghc.
Would not be better to have these ports merged? If I recall correctly, Samy already said something like that on IRC a while ago. However, it is a still an open question(?) what to do with libraries and their documentation. In ports of Ashish and mine, we respect the NOPORTDOCS variable, so these ports could be installed with or without documentation by setting this.
I'm sorry but I referred to the pr: http://www.freebsd.org/cgi/query-pr.cgi?pr=ports/120975
1) My first question is how I could become a named developer in this team like the current developers:
I do not know who is maintaining the effort's web page, but I would point to Samy. He is the administrator here. I do not have any objection to include you. The more developer we have, the more we can progress.
Thank you for your credit; so I will ask Samy.
I haven't any important objection about this, but fixing the maintainer in this way reduces, for me, the level of responsibility and attention to each single haskell port.
I do not think you would be bored when we will have more than many hundreds of hs-* ports :P
Well I understand the problem but there are, at least, two points: 1) Sorry for the simple example (perhaps I don't hit the mark), but the majority of ports (thousands) depends on the compiler gcc and it isn't a problem having a different maintainer for each port. I don't think this is unmanageable. 2) Exist a "contributors list": http://www.freebsd.org/doc/en_US.ISO8859-1/articles/contributors/index.html and this is connected with each single named maintainer. In any way this isn't, definitely, a problem for me.
problems somehow. Okay, I will check out the referenced PRs. Thank you for pointing this out!
Thanks, I'd like you could weight my work and give me some suggestions. Giuseppe