Hey!

On 02/13/2014 09:17 PM, Chris Muller wrote:
> Göran, I could never feel hostility toward you.

:) I kinda got the feeling I was talked to like some "renegade to those 
awful Pharooners" ;)

Thanks

> What I do/did feel
> about deleting projects is some "urgency" to speak before you pushed
> the delete button.

I think you may have misunderstood me a bit (sloppy writing of me), see 
below.

> If you are the _sole_ admin (and sole developer), sure, the decision
> is yours, but the subject if this thread is about _Andreas'_ projects
> and what to do.

Well, we talked about both situations, but sure.

> You suggested 1) gain access, 2) copy to new repo, 3)
> delete old repo.  If we are talking about Andreas' projects, then I'm
> strongly opposed to 3.  If we weren't, then I apologize for my
> misunderstanding.

The delete part was sloppy written - I never meant to *just* delete 
something! I meant, copy somewhere else and delete. In other words - move.

I am asking these questions from pure practical reasons. I have fixes I 
want to get properly integrated wherever they need to be. I don't want 
to mess with old repos that aren't maintained - I want to know the 
*primary* repo for a given Project, like SqueakSSL for example.

> I'm also opposed to (1) only to the extent it mutates any objects
> Andreas made.  If we could get by with ONLY adding new versions to a
> project, then that'd only be extending Andreas' original work without
> modifying it, probably fine.  Otherwise, I think we should extend it
> in a new project of our own, and add or update appropriate entries in
> the catalog.

Interesting notion. I guess that is also a route, mark all Andreas 
projects as "These are not maintained but kept readonly as they were 
when Andreas left us to respect him. For maintained derivatives see xxxx."

Sure, that works too. BUT... do note that many people find stuff by 
googling and this is a bit of an issue:

- If people end up on the actual versions HTML pages, then they don't 
get any warning that they are looking at a stale repo.

- If people google and find a repo doit, and enter that into Monticello, 
they also never see the note.

Of course, the "hack" to add a snapshot mentioning that it is not a 
maintained repo - that actually works fairly well.

> We could _try_ to do catalog management by deleting projects from SS
> or leaving notes to go look somewhere else, but in a community and
> license that encourages copy-and-modify, that is a futile and
> certainly lame way to do cataloging, because a new project with the
> same or similar name would spring up and lead to the same or similar
> confusion you're trying to avoid for someone looking for Göran's code.
>
> For others' projects for which we have no admin access, it simply
> doesn't work at all, because its wrong to break in and molest their
> space.

I agree, it is a hopeless war :) :) - but I still am free to do my best 
to avoid confusion on my own stuff. I really hope you are not seriously 
considering forbidding deleting projects.

regards, Göran