This page is not created by, affiliated with, or supported by Slack Technologies, Inc.
2022-11-06
Channels
- # announcements (3)
- # babashka (1)
- # beginners (26)
- # calva (1)
- # cider (17)
- # clj-commons (16)
- # clj-kondo (11)
- # clojure (21)
- # clojure-europe (9)
- # clojure-norway (1)
- # clojure-portugal (2)
- # clojure-spec (8)
- # clojure-uk (4)
- # clojurescript (35)
- # datomic (5)
- # emacs (9)
- # figwheel-main (15)
- # fulcro (26)
- # honeysql (1)
- # lsp (5)
- # off-topic (2)
- # polylith (1)
- # rdf (6)
- # re-frame (4)
- # reagent (15)
- # reitit (9)
- # releases (2)
- # shadow-cljs (4)
- # sql (25)
- # squint (2)
- # xtdb (7)
Any objections if I ask the owner of this repo if they would be willing to put it under clj-commons group? https://github.com/matthiasn/talk-transcripts. I have no idea what their reaction to such a proposal would be, but if their answer is yes, would anyone mind?
@andy.fingerhut There are a few rules around this. See https://github.com/clj-commons/meta#entry-criteria
Thanks for that pointer. It is pure text and figures, no code, which is unusual for clj-commons. Other than that, it seems up to the existing owner whether they are willing to transfer ownership?
Is there an existing person who is willing to maintain that repo? Or is that not applicable? If there aren't going to be any updates in that repo, why not leave them there?
I have several PRs open that I would like to see merged in, and would be happy to approve PRs.
It is not changing rapidly, but it is nice to add new things in a timely fashion, if possible
Looking at PRs, there are about 9, spread over last 2 years, with no responses.
Are you willing to step up as maintainer of that repo? And is the old maintainer willing to transfer?
I am willing to be new maintainer. I wanted to ask here whether folks considered it a good idea to ask the current maintainer about this, before asking them.
My 2 cts: I think it would be valuable to preserve that repo and have it be maintained, so I'm for it. Also tagging @U04V5VAUN and @U04V70XH6 for their input on this.
If Matthias no longer has time or interest in maintaining the repo, it would be reasonable to transfer it to clj-commons -- but it definitely needs his input on that.
It looks -- from his GH account and his blog -- that he has moved away from Clojure and mostly does Dart/Flutter these days (after doing some Swift stuff), so that may explain his lack of activity on the repo -- but it does seem to satisfy the Entry Criteria at this point.
(and it would be great to have all those additional transcripts added, that are currently languishing as PRs!)
So if I ask him, I can mention that (a) this is completely his choice, and optional, (b) the repo would continue to exist, and we would be glad to mention his name prominently in README as having started it, and the commit history will not change, and (c) a group of interested volunteers will approve future PRs, (d) the URL will change to https://github.com/clj-commons/talk-transcripts, but Github maintains redirects from the old URL to the new one for some length of time (is that last part true?)
Yes, if the repo is transferred by him to clj-commons, GH will maintain a redirect for it.
OK, I have asked in an issue: https://github.com/matthiasn/talk-transcripts/issues/110