[Haskell-cafe] Package Takeover: `toml`

[Tom Ellis]

On Fri, Mar 12, 2021 at 12:36:16PM +0100, Henning Thielemann wrote:
> On Thu, 11 Mar 2021, amindfv--- via Haskell-Cafe wrote:
> > Again, trying to be respectful here, but "burning" kinda does imply
> > "fire," and "need" certainly does imply "need." It's now seeming more
> > just like a desire for the package name.
> 
> I have nothing to do with 'toml' but the many takeover requests in the
> recent past make me nervous that if I am away from Haskell programming for
> some weeks or months brings me in danger of losing my packages. Btw. for
> some years I was not subscribed to Haskell Cafe because of high traffic and
> I would have missed such takeover request. I think the preference should be
> to create a fork.

This raises an interesting question: to whom does the entry in the
package namespace belong? There's a tacit assumption that it belongs
to the first person who registered it. Arguably though it could be
deemed to belong to the community.  The more "generic" the name the
more water that argument seems to hold.  

The solution of "create a fork" could equally well be turned around to
apply to a package maintainer who returns after a long absence to find
that the community has taken over maintenance of her package.  I don't
think there's any absolute sense in which that is the wrong answer.

We won't find a general principle that holds in all cases but I do
think it is worth discussing and perhaps coming up with some voluntary
principles that maintainers can sign up to.  Looking to how other
language ecosystems handle this issue may be helpful.

Tom