Stream: Coq Platform devs & users

Topic: Summary of obligations of package maintainers


view this post on Zulip Andrew Appel (Nov 29 2021 at 19:20):

Dear Coq Platform people: Is there a written summary of what you expect from the maintainer of a package that is part of the Coq Platform? I intend to nominate a package for the Coq Platform, and I would like to be able to tell the maintainers of that package what they are committing to.

view this post on Zulip Enrico Tassi (Nov 29 2021 at 19:23):

Here: https://github.com/coq/platform/blob/main/charter.md#package-inclusion-process

view this post on Zulip Karl Palmskog (Nov 29 2021 at 19:37):

one informal requirement that is probably not documented yet: Michael prefers version numbers to be >= 1, e.g., 1.0, 1.2, 2.34, etc.

view this post on Zulip Karl Palmskog (Nov 29 2021 at 19:41):

also, here is my unofficial informal summary: assuming a project is considered useful/stable enough to be in the platform, maintainers need to create timely tested tags in their repo for each major Coq version, and be responsive to issues/PRs opened by platform maintainers + make proper use of CI for their project.

view this post on Zulip Théo Zimmermann (Nov 29 2021 at 19:43):

Karl Palmskog said:

one informal requirement that is probably not documented yet: Michael prefers version numbers to be >= 1, e.g., 1.0, 1.2, 2.34, etc.

Indeed, the platform is not very specific on this aspect, but basically, the idea is that if you are not past 1.0, then you should likely get into the "extended level" instead of the "full level".


Last updated: Jan 30 2023 at 11:03 UTC