Hi,
I'd prefer that we omit the maintainer field for packages whose
maintainer is unknown. I think that this leads to a cleaner design
than choosing an arbitrary distinguished value.
-Iavor
On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 7:10 AM, Ross Paterson
On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 11:14:51AM +0100, Duncan Coutts wrote:
Looks good to me, except that I think I agree with Gwern that an empty maintainer field is better than a distinguished value like "none".
Is that still your view?
We can always make the web page note that the package has no maintainer.
If on the other hand everyone thinks "none" is a good idea then we should make hackage upload enforce that the maintainer field is not empty.
The library already warns about it; all that would be needed is to adjust the severity level. _______________________________________________ Libraries mailing list Libraries@haskell.org http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries