> The easiest tweak I can think of would be to add a "Inbox" tab to the Project page.  Anyone can then be allowed to submit to the project.  Internally, all versions are stored in the same project directory, but the legacy Versions tab would be changed to filter only the versions which are authored by those with write access, while the Inbox tab would show those without write access.

Side note: An even easier tweak would be uploading your proposals to source.squeak.org/inbox. Maintainers can then integrate them later in the squeaksource.com project and move the version from the inbox to treated. I don't know whether anyone would mind about this. But a real fork/inbox-per-project solution would be more favorable, of course.

Best,
Christoph

________________________________
Von: Squeak-dev <squeak-dev-bounces at lists.squeakfoundation.org> im Auftrag von Jakob Reschke <jakres+squeak at gmail.com>
Gesendet: Donnerstag, 6. Oktober 2022 09:41:17
An: The general-purpose Squeak developers list
Betreff: Re: [squeak-dev] Fixes for possible abandoned squeaksource.com projects

Just to relate with the outside world: GitHub, Bitbucket & Co have "forks" as a solution. Since Monticello is distributed, Squeaksource could offer the same feature.

To serve the purpose of reviving abandoned projects, such forks would have to be made easily visible on the original project's page. Because without project admin access, the original project description will obviously not change to point to the newer repository.

Depending on the implementation it could be nearly the same as the inbox proposal of Chris. Just that forks are not publicly writeable.



karl ramberg <karlramberg at gmail.com<mailto:karlramberg at gmail.com>> schrieb am Mi., 5. Okt. 2022, 22:45:


On Wed, Oct 5, 2022 at 10:38 PM Chris Muller <asqueaker at gmail.com<mailto:asqueaker at gmail.com>> wrote:
The easiest tweak I can think of would be to add a "Inbox" tab to the Project page.  Anyone can then be allowed to submit to the project.  Internally, all versions are stored in the same project directory, but the legacy Versions tab would be changed to filter only the versions which are authored by those with write access, while the Inbox tab would show those without write access.

+1

Best,
Karl

[ss-inbox-idea.png]

Without the above, since only admin-level can delete submitted versions, and configuration is a separate issue from source code repository, I've started opening up my repositories for public write access.  Why did I ever think I wanted to discourage contributions?  It theoretically opens them up for spam attacks, but we haven't seen that with our Inbox.

 - Chris

On Wed, Oct 5, 2022 at 1:01 AM karl ramberg <karlramberg at gmail.com<mailto:karlramberg at gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi,
I made a small fix for the RayTracing project.
http://www.squeaksource.com/RayTracing.html
Vector needed to subclass Float32Array instead of FloatArray.

But the RayTracing project is read only.

Do we have a best practice for stuff like this?
I uploaded the fix to my own squeaksource account

Best,
Karl





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20221006/47dd044e/attachment-0001.html>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: ss-inbox-idea.png
Type: image/png
Size: 265708 bytes
Desc: ss-inbox-idea.png
URL: <http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20221006/47dd044e/attachment-0001.png>