'temporary' package

[Andreas Abel]

On 07.05.2014 14:49, Roman Cheplyaka wrote:
> Having backup maintainers is the answer.
> http://ro-che.info/articles/2014-02-08-my-haskell-will.html

Yes!  +1

hackage should require a backup maintainer for every library package upload.

>> On May 7, 2014 8:36 AM, "Roman Cheplyaka" <roma at ro-che.info> wrote:
>>
>>> No. In my opinion, there's no good reason why a package should remain
>>> broken for
>>> more than a day, given that there are people who has found, reported, and
>>> fixed
>>> the issue. All the actual work is done, now someone just has to push a
>>> button.
>>>
>>> * Oliver Charles <ollie at ocharles.org.uk> [2014-05-07 13:29:40+0100]
>>>> Isn't a 4 day turn around on a pull request a little hasty?
>>>>
>>>> - ocharles
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 8:50 AM, Roman Cheplyaka <roma at ro-che.info>
>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hi Max,
>>>>>
>>>>> are you still maintaining the 'temporary' package?
>>>>> There's a breakage waiting to be fixed (with a patch):
>>>>> https://github.com/batterseapower/temporary/pull/12
>>>>>
>>>>> If I don't hear from you in two days, I'll request maintainership
>>> and/or
>>>>> fork the package.
>>>>>
>>>>> Roman
>>>>>
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Libraries mailing list
>>>>> Libraries at haskell.org
>>>>> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Libraries mailing list
>>> Libraries at haskell.org
>>> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Libraries mailing list
>>> Libraries at haskell.org
>>> http://www.haskell.org/mailman/listinfo/libraries


-- 
Andreas Abel  <><      Du bist der geliebte Mensch.

Department of Computer Science and Engineering
Chalmers and Gothenburg University, Sweden

andreas.abel at gu.se
http://www2.tcs.ifi.lmu.de/~abel/