On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 8:42 AM, Aleksey Lim <alsr...@sugarlabs.org> wrote: > On Tue, Dec 24, 2013 at 10:02:42AM -0200, Gonzalo Odiard wrote: >> Hi Aleksey, >> I agree with you, but Alan have tried to communicate with Luiz for a month, >> and the activity didn't had any development for 4 years, >> then in this case, is not a disrespect to the maintainer. >> It is possible at least add Alan to the project as owner, without remove >> Luiz? > > If there are issues with having new repo, could you share them. > > Otherwise, git.sl.o, in my mind, is a regular site to host users' > repositories. For example, I will rather stop using github if its admins > decide to grant permissions to the repo I created to other people. >
Aleksey, As a general rule, I cannot disagree with your concerns about FOSS standards of ownership in general. However, Sugar Labs in some ways does more to respect the original owner's work by taking over control of it and keeping it going. In particular, we have a lot of first-time authors that generate an activity as a student project, but are not really committed to it's long-term maintenance in the way people usually are in a FOSS project. I fully believe that if an original author returned to active development, the caretaker would be more than willing to relinquish control back, including hte possibility of forking their work off and giving the original owner a rolled-back repo. In this case, I am in favor fo turning over ownership and not forking, it also helps a lot with keeping Pootle simpler (for thos activities tha a=re set up). Just my 2 cents. cjl _______________________________________________ Sugar-devel mailing list Sugar-devel@lists.sugarlabs.org http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
