On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 07:15:12PM +0200, Bryan Richter wrote:
Can I suggest to the Hackage Whoever a slight change in policy?
I think the shock of seeing a package takeover request for your own package is understandably, uh, shocking, and makes the ensuing discussion tense. I also feel like most takeover requests follow this pattern; rarely does a package end up changing hands.
Perhaps it's a problem of tone.
I wasn't at all shocked at the original request. I figured, correctly, Emily had looked at the package on Hackage and not seen a maintainer listed. Seemed like an easy fix. If you look at the original messages I was ready and willing to help. The shock, if there was any, came from what felt like an unwarranted claim of an urgent need, and a push to take it over even after I materialized.
Rather than suggesting "State your intention to take over the package in a public forum ", step 2 should lighten up and state, "After trying to reach the maintainer for a reasonable amount of time, reach out to the public to expand your search."
I don't have a problem with the original wording but I do like your change. Tom
https://wiki.haskell.org/Taking_over_a_package
On Fri, 12 Mar 2021, 18.59 Henning Thielemann, < lemming@henning-thielemann.de> wrote:
On Fri, 12 Mar 2021, Brandon Allbery wrote:
That depends. Can I in fact, were I looking for a maintainer, find out who to contact about the package? Ideally without much digging.
That's what the Cabal.Maintainer field is for. It is missing in toml, which is bad.
_______________________________________________ Haskell-Cafe mailing list To (un)subscribe, modify options or view archives go to: http://mail.haskell.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/haskell-cafe Only members subscribed via the mailman list are allowed to post.