agreeing a policy for maintainers and hackageDB

[Iavor Diatchki]

Hi,
I'd prefer that we omit the maintainer field for packages whose
maintainer is unknown.  I think that this leads to a cleaner design
than choosing an arbitrary distinguished value.
-Iavor

On Thu, Jun 26, 2008 at 7:10 AM, Ross Paterson <ross at soi.city.ac.uk> wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 23, 2008 at 11:14:51AM +0100, Duncan Coutts wrote:
>> Looks good to me, except that I think I agree with Gwern that an empty
>> maintainer field is better than a distinguished value like "none".
>
> Is that still your view?
>
>> We can always make the web page note that the package has no maintainer.
>>
>> If on the other hand everyone thinks "none" is a good idea then we
>> should make hackage upload enforce that the maintainer field is not
>> empty.
>
> The library already warns about it; all that would be needed is to
> adjust the severity level.
> _______________________________________________
> Libraries mailing list
> Libraries at haskell.org
> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries
>