On Wed, Jan 09, 2013 at 05:18:15PM +0000, Vincent Hanquez wrote:
On 01/09/2013 01:24 PM, Joachim Breitner wrote:
So it seems the impact of a non-compatible upload to uri would be low.
The question is more likely: Do maintainers have a strong ownership of names they claim on hackage, or do we liberally take over names when it is for the greater good? In Debian, such a name-take-over would be highly controversial, but I’m not saying that this is a good thing.
Personally i would be in favor of taking over a package name provided the following:
* provided it's a platform thing. * it has wide support in the community * the package name is generic enough * the amount of breakage is minimal * the authors / maintainers have been contacted (if way to contact are still valid)
I think it would be useful to make and record somewhere a decision about who has the final say about names of packages on hackage. My opinion is that "the current user of the name" is a bad choice, given names are allocated on a first-come first-served basis. My suggestion would be for the haskell.org committee to ultimately have the final say (although we'd obviously hope that the parties involved would normally come to an amicable agreement without having to go that far). Thanks Ian