Github.com/haskell appropriating transformers package

[BebeSparkelSparkel]

The repository for transformers seems to be unresponsive to issues and pulls. This seems like a very important package that should be maintained and improved. What are your thoughts on adding github.com/haskell/transformers and pointing hackage to that repository?

[hasufell]

transformers is not listed as a core library: GitHub - haskell/core-libraries-committee

Unless that was an oversight, that means CLC can’t assist. And even if it was considered a core library: these still have independent maintainers and decisions concerning workflow are afaiu up to the maintainers discretion. CLC just helps with ensuring active maintenance of said core libraries, but doesn’t otherwise interfere.

So either way, this doesn’t strike me as a community decision.

If there are patches you can’t get in, the next processes you may try are:

• simple patches via NMU
• package takeover

Before doing so, did you try to contact the maintainer via email?

[ocramz]

OP never mentioned the CLC? Moreover, in the github org there are many projects than those counting as “core” packages.

[hasufell]

@ocramz

OP never mentioned the CLC?

The reason I brought it up is that there are only two processes under which you could complain about unresponsive maintainers:

• the package is a core library => contact CLC
• the package is a regular package => attempt a package takeover

Hackage is not a democracy where you can tell people to use Github. Please respect the maintainers.

[Ambrose]

It is odd that mtl is under the haskell GH namespace but transformers (its only dependency - and the main way its classes become runtime code) is not.

[ocramz]

The distinction between popular OSS packages that occupy an append-only namespace as being public infrastructure versus artwork is ultimately ideological, and no amount of forum debate will change this.

[BebeSparkelSparkel]

Changed to uncatagorized

[Kleidukos]

MTL probably ought to self-host its transformers

[BebeSparkelSparkel]

If they aren’t maintaining it, they aren’t maintainers.

[hasufell]

Have you tried to contact the maintainer via email?

[BebeSparkelSparkel]

It was a while ago but I think I did. I’ll try again. Thanks for the suggestion.

[Bodigrim]

Maintaining core packages is a rather thankless job, and people do it for decades for free. So please bear in mind that you are not entitled to any particular service level.

[f-a]

@BebeSparkelSparkel, I took the liberty of changing the tag from “Core Libraries Committee” to “Uncategorized”

You might be interested in Taking over a package.

[BebeSparkelSparkel]

@Bodigrim I am not expecting service from the current owner of transformers. What I am suggesting is that the github.com/haskell organization consider adding transformers to their managed repos. Since, it falls under all the criteria of the CLC and is a direct dependency many repos already managed by the CLC.

[hasufell]

@BebeSparkelSparkel

What I am suggesting is that the github.com/haskell organization consider adding transformers to their managed repos

There’s no such thing as “managed repos” in the haskell org. A repo existing under github haskell org does not give CLC or the community or anyone else ownership of it.

The github haskell org is a loose structure.

@BebeSparkelSparkel

Since, it falls under all the criteria of the CLC

This is not clear.

I opened Is `transformers` a core library? · Issue #271 · haskell/core-libraries-committee · GitHub for clarification.

And even if it was under CLC ownership, I would not want to tell core library maintainers where to host their repos.

[f-a]

@hasufell

This is not clear.

I opened Is transformers a core library? · Issue #271 · haskell/core-libraries-committee · GitHub for clarification.

And even if it was under CLC ownership, I would not want to tell core library maintainers where to host their repos.

I would add, adding a library to CLC still has to pass through a maintainer:

As a collective entity CLC owns, but does not maintain, so-called Core Libraries, which are libraries

• that are depended on by many other packages, and hence play a particularly important role in the Haskell ecosystem; and
• whose maintainers have agreed (or requested) support from the CLC in ensuring the long-term health of the library.

(italics mine). I believe there is some foundamental misunderstanding about what CLC does.

@BebeSparkelSparkel said he want to contact the maintainer of transformers. This is welcome news, it will take some time, I am sure it will be fruitful.

[hasufell]

@f-a

I would add, adding a library to CLC still has to pass through a maintainer

Of course. But it may very well be the CLC that approaches said maintainer (e.g. because it is a dependency of an existing core library).

[BebeSparkelSparkel]

@hasufell

And even if it was under CLC ownership, I would not want to tell core library maintainers where to host their repos.

I’m not sure this is actually possible. If CLC owns the library, then it must have control of the library and thus must be at github.com/haskell or some other site under an account the CLC does control.

[hasufell]

No, CLC does not control haskell Github org. Again: it’s a loose structure.

Packages under CLC ownership have appropriate maintainer settings on hackage, in case the actual maintainer goes missing.

That’s all that is needed. The development repository is irrelevant for this process.

[BebeSparkelSparkel]

Thanks for clarifying the CLC.

Now, I am only specifically talking about the github.com/haskell organization adding transformers to its managed repos and pointing hackage at github.com/haskell/transformers.

Is that something that github.com/haskell and hackage would be willing to do? If so, what needs to be done to accomplish that?