Re: Maintenance status of individual Org libraries

[Ihor Radchenko]

Bastien Guerry <bzg@gnu.org> writes:

> Ihor Radchenko <yantar92@posteo.net> writes:
>
>> Should we try to make a call for maintenance at least for some of these
>> libraries?
>
> Definitely.  We should probably prioritize files in this list, then
> ask on this list *and* on the web.
>
> Let's make sure we propose this as something fun to do, not a chore.
>
> How do you want to proceed?

I have no concrete plan. Some random thoughts:

- We may run a poll on how people use various parts of Org to see
  popularity/user base for different libraries. This may be a useful
  metrics for prioritization.

- We may need to identify the core libraries that have to be maintained
  better because everything else relies upon them.

- Some people are scared of maintenance partly because they do not want
  to follow all the messages in the mailing list.

- Rather than asking straight about maintenance, we may ask about
  problem people encounter with the Org libraries they use.  Having some
  real, personal problem to solve may be a driver to get started with
  maintaining a library.

- Instead of maintenance, we can ask people to demo using some less
  popular libraries during meetups (like
  https://orgmode.org/list/87tttlflht.fsf@localhost). This may reveal
  problems better and may allow writing the often missing tests. At
  least, tests can make things more robust even if not maintained.

-- 
Ihor Radchenko // yantar92,
Org mode contributor,
Learn more about Org mode at <https://orgmode.org/>.
Support Org development at <https://liberapay.com/org-mode>,
or support my work at <https://liberapay.com/yantar92>