On Tue, 2 Oct 2018 at 23:21, Peter Uhnak <i.uh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Tue, Oct 2, 2018 at 4:55 PM Sean P. DeNigris <s...@clipperadams.com> > wrote: > >> Guillermo Polito wrote >> > when somebody migrates the repository. >> >> Who has access to the Pharo-contributions GH organization? Is that the >> "go-to" repository for this case? I'm not often clear about under which GH >> user/org something should be ported if one is not the owner. Do we have a >> policy? > >
> In this case, to get the ball rolling would it be possible to create >> under one's own user account > > and then transfer to ownership the appropriate entity? > > That seems reasonable. It should be simple to later fork that repo under Pharo-contributions. > > If the project is actively maintained, then please ask the maintainer > (e.g. I'm waiting for monty to respond to my offer to migrate XMLParser). > > Migrating it under your own account is sending signal to the community "I > am going to take care and MAINTAIN this project.". > Unless that is your intention, then pharo-contribs seems like the best > choice. Unlike the old approach it is easy for anyone to contribute with > pull requests without having to wait for access rights or whatnot. > I may be out of line, but in this era of super-simple forking (e.g. on github), I feel the rules have evolved. Over time I've encountered several projects having "This is a mirror of XXXX at YYYY (e.g. some svn repo)" as the first line of their README.md - perhaps in bold or red. Pointing to the location of the canonical repo always seemed to me to be reasonable attribution and indication of where care and maintenance is focused. cheers -ben
