On Thu, Oct 6, 2022 at 2:41 AM Jakob Reschke <jakres+squeak at gmail.com>
wrote:

> 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.
>

Monticello supports branches

   PackageName[.branchName]-author.versionNumber

However, I think branches should only be used if it truly needs to be
branched (e.g., due to some overwhelming implementation change).  If it's
just a fix, it shouldn't be a branch.

What we want is to preserve the integral legacy of the original author's
page, simply out of respect, while also allowing an appendage to extend its
life and development which, in a way, also bestows respect (compared to
creating new "competing" projects).

"Inbox" isn't my favorite name for the new tab, I actually prefer "Latest",
but it's already taken..

 - Chris
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.squeakfoundation.org/pipermail/squeak-dev/attachments/20221007/21eb7b14/attachment.html>