On 4 Nov 2016, at 10:59, Hannes Mehnert <[email protected]> wrote: > > On 04/11/2016 10:51, Anil Madhavapeddy wrote: >> On 4 Nov 2016, at 10:45, Christiano F. Haesbaert <[email protected]> >> wrote: >>> >>> On 4 November 2016 at 00:16, Mindy <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> These changes have been merged! Thanks for all of you who helped out, >>>> particularly Drup and Hannes who provided a lot of helpful code review and >>>> feedback. Also, many thanks to haesbaert, as charrua-core was a dream to >>>> work with -- charrua-client is very small, and over half of it is tests. :) >>>> >>> >>> Oh that made my day \o/. >>> >>> Would you like to merge that into charrua-core ? >>> I can give you commit access too. >>> >>> I've been wanting to rename charrua-core to charrua-dhcp, then it could >>> provide >>> both Dhcp_server and Dhcp_client. >> >> Should we perhaps also move the Charrua repos under the mirage/ org and give >> you >> all access there? This keeps the dependent cluster of protocol libraries in >> one >> place. > > To jump in here: moving everything to a single organisation on GitHub > might seem to be a good idea at first sight: new people might be able to > more easily find active projects... but I don't think this is true at > all, browsing a GitHub organisation with >100 repositories (of unknown > state) is tedious.
I think project discovery should be decoupled from the administrative process. There's a lot of utility in retaining the ability to group related repositories into one place, particularly those core to the project. People naturally come and go as their time permits, but keeping an authoritative copy of the code in one place is the purpose of the organisation. This then leaves people with the freedom to have their person accounts be places where they can rearrange and organise their code as they see fit, rather than have it be a core dependency on a bigger project. > Since TravisCI limits to 5 instances per organisation, there shouldn't > be any incentive to centralise the libraries. > > And I still believe we need a dashboard and push forward with opam tags > to get an overview of active libraries -- http://docs.mirage.io is a > good first step in that direction. > > Maybe there should be a MirageOS unikernel gallery as well (since for > some reason unikernels are not managed by opam (yet?)), These are all things that need to (and will) happen, but not a reason to block keeping our core networking libraries under one organisation right now :) Anil _______________________________________________ MirageOS-devel mailing list [email protected] https://lists.xenproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/mirageos-devel
