Stream: coq-community devs & users

Topic: Keeping old maintainers in meta.yml


view this post on Zulip Karl Palmskog (Jun 02 2020 at 14:29):

So in the interest of giving credit where due, I think it may be a good idea to keep old maintainers of coq-community projects in meta.yml, even if we don't display them (but on the other hand, maybe they should be in README.md as well?) -- adding a flag like current: true or current: false could be quite simple.

view this post on Zulip Karl Palmskog (Jun 02 2020 at 14:31):

thoughts @Théo Zimmermann @Anton Trunov ?

view this post on Zulip Théo Zimmermann (Jun 02 2020 at 14:32):

Or you could also move them to a list of "Former coq-community maintainers:" that would be displayed in the README only if it is defined.

view this post on Zulip Anton Trunov (Jun 02 2020 at 14:33):

Thanks for bringing this up. I'm in favor of giving more visibility to each and every participant. I see this kind of information retained for a lot of academic projects, for instance.

view this post on Zulip Karl Palmskog (Jun 02 2020 at 14:33):

so you mean like:

former_maintainers:
- name: James R Hacker
  nickname: jrh

view this post on Zulip Karl Palmskog (Jun 02 2020 at 14:35):

I think that kind of list is a little bit more awkward than a flag, but both work I guess

view this post on Zulip Théo Zimmermann (Jun 02 2020 at 14:44):

I think that kind of list is a little bit more awkward than a flag, but both work I guess

view this post on Zulip Théo Zimmermann (Jun 02 2020 at 14:45):

My point is that in the README it would render better to have a list of former maintainers (that is only displayed when it is defined) than having a list of maintainers with (current) in parentheses even if only one maintainer is listed.

view this post on Zulip Théo Zimmermann (Jun 02 2020 at 14:45):

But maybe I'm wrong.

view this post on Zulip Théo Zimmermann (Jun 02 2020 at 14:46):

The inclusion of the GitHub nickname for former maintainers might not be necessary BTW.

view this post on Zulip Karl Palmskog (Jun 02 2020 at 14:54):

OK, no need to agree on this now, I will simply open an issue in the template repo and summarize the currently proposed solutions


Last updated: Feb 05 2023 at 14:02 UTC