Re: OF package maintainers please vote: Scope of OF?

[Olaf Till]

OF packages maintained by me: optim, parallel, database, struct

my vote: 2.2.

Some argumentation:

On Tue, Jan 10, 2017 at 01:51:28PM +0100, Olaf Till wrote:
> 1. Simply maintain a list of packages, hosted elsewhere.
> 
> 2. Continue to execercise some central control onto contained
>    packages, making the package maintainers potentially bound to some
>    majority- or admin-decisions.
> 
> For 2., two subvariants have been proposed:
> 
> 2.1. In addition to the controled packages, maintain a list of
>      independent packages, checked only for some formal structural
>      conformance, which are primarily hosted elsewhere. OF contains
>      'copies' of the external repositories, synchronized at least at
>      release time. The package maintainer has exclusive control, if OF
>      decides to fork the package, a different package name must be
>      used.
> 
> 2.2. Only the controled packages are contained in OF.

To my experience, some coordination between Octave and the packages is
beneficial, or even necessary. For coordination to be feasible, some
central control of packages is necessary. So 2.

Maintaining an additional list of external packages is additional
work. And maintaining the 'copies' of the external repositories is
even more work, with a potential for problems with synchronization. If
we promote external packages, we promote increasing this additional
work, and maybe even promote a status change of packages from
controled to external. A list of external packages can be hosted
elsewhere, but IMO does not belong to OF. So 2.2.

Olaf

-- 
public key id EAFE0591, e.g. on x-hkp://pool.sks-keyservers.net

signature.asc
Description: Digital signature