Clojurians
#cloverage
<
2016-08-11
>

This page is not created by, affiliated with, or supported by Slack Technologies, Inc.

jaceklach20:08:20

@rhu: @lvh: it might be simpler if rather than asking LShift to abandon the project officially and transfer the repo, you just request to be added to the clojars group that is allowed to publish cloverage/cloverage. Then if all else fails you can fork the main repo to the cloverage team, which I own and which LShift has never been involved in, and you can use your own creds to publish releases (though I’d still prefer that to happen with explicit agreement from the LShift side) For context, I believe Tom is working on cloverage just kinda in his own free time, he’s not the person who makes the decision about ‘giving it up’ (or at least he wouldn’t be back when I worked at LShift), and the people who do have that responsibility are very busy and reasonably default to "see things don’t fizzle out first”. Having shared publishing priviledges (the only missing capability at this point, I think?) rather than transferring them over gives them a way of regaining access should everyone else go inactive.

lvh22:08:22

I thought I did ask about that specifically, let me re-read the ticket backlog

lvh22:08:54

oh, I missed some of the feedback @rhu gave

lvh22:08:09

He’s definitely echoing my sentiments pretty accurately, I’m guessing I’m not alone there

lvh22:08:24

The thing that is confusing to me in particular is the stated reason of PR

lvh22:08:48

whereas I think that any reasonable person reading that ticket would conclude that they’re not really being suitable stewards

lvh22:08:20

@jaceklach: Would it be OK if I add that this was your suggestion?

lvh22:08:32

@jaceklach: On an unrelated note, you wouldn’t happen to be in Poland? :slightly_smiling_face:

lvh22:08:41

(moja żona jest polką, mieszkaliśmy przez rok w krakowie)

lvh22:08:57

(grammar fails mine)

lvh23:08:13

https://github.com/lshift/cloverage/issues/103#issuecomment-239319109 <= I think that is a pretty reasonable and diplomatic way of putting it

jaceklach23:08:55

@lvh I am indeed Polish, but I live in London nowadays. Yeah, I like how you put it in

jaceklach23:08:41

Thanks for not directly quoting me; I’d rather you just used the context to form better questions about what their requirements are, rather htan use it as descriptive of their current processes and a base for solutions. It might be all out of date, after all.

jaceklach23:08:31

lemme read the original post to try to dig down on the PR aspect

lvh23:08:47

tbh I think the PR aspect is the only real issue they care about

lvh23:08:59

if they just care about continued maintainership, cloverage/cloverage is better, not worse