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

[Sebastian Schöps]

Oliver Heimlich wrote
>> 1. Simply maintain a list of packages, hosted elsewhere.
> Nobody has voted for option 1 yet, so I see a problem that we are
> missing the new package database (meta repository), which is required to
> get away from 2.1. Maybe we can build on top of some existing software
> (like a tailored version of the FSF free software directory).

I was in favour of 1 at a time nobody volunteered for maintaining OF
(including me). Now, since we have competent and motivated people for the
job (thank you guys), I do not see why we should not continue with OF. 

However, moving away from sourceforge would be great as the collaboration
among among projects is way better at gitlab, github or bitbucket (but this
is another topic...).


Olaf Till-2 wrote
> 2.2. Only the controled packages are contained in OF. 

I do not see why we need to pull the external packages into OF since this
might require more effort for both the OF maintainers and package
maintainer. It might increase the quality but not all package maintainers
are looking for this "service". 
I vote for 2.2 instead 2.1. However, then we need an easy installation from
3rd party sites e.g. by 

(a) url (pkg install -url http://somewhere/package";) or 
(b) package name ("pkg install -external name"). 

Known third party packages could be maintained as a xml-file in the OF
repository (name, author, version, url, possibly description).

Sebastian

P.S.: Carlo, Jacopo and I have already started maintaining odepkg at
bitbucket. We plan to push releases to OF. 



--
View this message in context: 
http://octave.1599824.n4.nabble.com/OF-package-maintainers-please-vote-Scope-of-OF-tp4681358p4681438.html
Sent from the Octave - Maintainers mailing list archive at Nabble.com.