On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Neil Van Dyke <[email protected]> wrote:
> Robby Findler wrote at 12/06/2013 09:38 AM: > > > >> >> You could also remove it from both planet repositories to just hide it >> from planet depending on your desire to support older versions of racket. >> >> >> Wouldn't that break all code that has a direct or indirect dependency on >> any version of that PLaneT package? >> >> > Yes. I should have been more clear: there are a number of packages on > planet that currently just don't work and for which there are new package > system variants. Depending on the authors' intentions to support those > planet packages, this may be a good idea. I'm specifically thinking about > authors that expect only newcomers to come across them and then to get > broken code and they would rather those newcomers just didn't find the > planet packages and instead found the new package system's code, this might > be a viable approach. > > > All these years, I have had a different assumption of what it means for a > package or version to be added to the PLaneT server. If a package or > version was there at some point, then I would still expect it to still be > there, even if it doesn't work with the latest versions of Racket or other > things. > > From my perspective, removing packages from PLaneT because one is not able > to maintain them (or perhaps wants to maintain them only in the new package > system, as you mention) doesn't seem like a great idea. I'd rather see > appropriate use of documentation and metadata to indicate that, say, the > package does not work with current versions of Racket or that it is no > longer being maintained. > > (The only cases in which I'd currently expect to see a version (not a > package) removed from PLaneT are if it was found to have a showstopper > security vulnerability, someone accidentally leaked very sensitive info > into the ".plt", or there was a court order.) > > As a practical matter, if others think that casually removing packages > from PLaneT is OK, then I'll just change how I use PLaneT accordingly, > rather than try to change people's minds. However, I do suspect that that > kind of measure erodes credibility a little, for practical and research > purposes. > > We definitely had the intention that packages should not be removed from planet when we first designed it. There was some backlast against that and so that position has softened a little bit. I do think that leaving things up there and updating the metadata/documentation/etc is a better approach too. Thanks for saying this. Robby
____________________ Racket Users list: http://lists.racket-lang.org/users
