Please clarify upstream repository and license #20

Open tarsius opened 3 years ago

According to information found in the org-contrib repository, the new upstream repository is https://github.com/phrb/ob-julia.

However that repository does not allow opening issues, so I am doing that here instead.

I would like to make the following suggestions. Please

Try to preserve the existing issues. If you want to stick with using phrb/ob-julia as the new upstream repository, then I suggest you (1) delete that repository and then (2) transfer the old gjkerns/ob-julia repository to phrb.
The ob-julia.el library has seen many changes while part of org-contrib. These changes should be incorporated into the current upstream repository.
In particular make sure you provide proper licensing information. I recommend adding a LICENSE file, using a conventional library header, and adding a spdx header: ;; SPDX-License-Identifier: GPL-3.0-or-later.

Thanks!

/cc @gjkerns @phrb @bzg

Thanks for calling attention to this.

I don't have access to this repository, hence the creation of the fork.

I do not oppose to deleting phrb/ob-julia and replaying any changes that I've made or that were made on org-contrib. Also, to incorporating the LICENSE file.

The current plan as I understood it was to move ob-julia completely to the org-mode savannah repository. I'm already a member there.

@gjkerns , what do you say?

Hello all,

Thank you for your interest in ob-julia. I haven't been active with org for some years, and I don't use Julia at all. I encourage anybody/everybody to fork my work and do with it whatever you like. Best wishes to you and may you make lots of progress on your endeavors.

G. Jay Kerns

Get Outlook for Androidhttps://aka.ms/AAb9ysg

From: Pedro Bruel @.> Sent: Tuesday, August 31, 2021 7:10:24 PM To: gjkerns/ob-julia @.> Cc: G. Jay Kerns @.>; Mention @.> Subject: Re: [gjkerns/ob-julia] Please clarify upstream repository and license (#20)

Thanks for the calling attention to this.

I don't have access to this repository, hence the creation of the fork.

I do not oppose to deleting phrb/ob-julia and replaying any changes that I've made or that were made on org-contrib. Also, to incorporating the LICENSE file.

The current plan as I understood it was to move ob-julia completely to the org-mode savannah repository. I'm already a member there.

@gjkernshttps://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/gjkerns__;!!GCVVS_VUUfljVg!Y8rxnAoj9Zf9ti1p9BlHr06uekXw45lu2jdgN93QOALIUmsoOA6KeZZEFIXADQ$ , what do you say?

— You are receiving this because you were mentioned. Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHubhttps://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/gjkerns/ob-julia/issues/20*issuecomment-909716348__;Iw!!GCVVS_VUUfljVg!Y8rxnAoj9Zf9ti1p9BlHr06uekXw45lu2jdgN93QOALIUmsoOA6KeZbi_Ae8lw$, or unsubscribehttps://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AADCHLFPWNTFIJ7VLDTP2K3T7VOOBANCNFSM5DB55EYQ__;!!GCVVS_VUUfljVg!Y8rxnAoj9Zf9ti1p9BlHr06uekXw45lu2jdgN93QOALIUmsoOA6KeZbeHOYzdg$. Triage notifications on the go with GitHub Mobile for iOShttps://urldefense.com/v3/__https://apps.apple.com/app/apple-store/id1477376905?ct=notification-email&mt=8&pt=524675__;!!GCVVS_VUUfljVg!Y8rxnAoj9Zf9ti1p9BlHr06uekXw45lu2jdgN93QOALIUmsoOA6KeZaoj5cNkQ$ or Androidhttps://urldefense.com/v3/__https://play.google.com/store/apps/details?id=com.github.android&referrer=utm_campaign*3Dnotification-email*26utm_medium*3Demail*26utm_source*3Dgithub__;JSUlJSU!!GCVVS_VUUfljVg!Y8rxnAoj9Zf9ti1p9BlHr06uekXw45lu2jdgN93QOALIUmsoOA6KeZZeRsRxOA$.

Thanks for the openness @gjkerns! I'm maintaing ob-julia now.

Would you be willing to transfer ownership of this repository to ~me~ someone, such as @tarsius, so I could keep track of past issues, and allow people to submit new ones?

I encourage anybody/everybody to fork my work and do with it whatever you like.

The best way of doing that would be for you to handover the repository to someone else. This would allow us to preserve past and future issues and pull-requests in a single repository. In this case the situation still is a bit unclear (see @phrb's response) but you might never-the-less prefer to take care of this now and be done with it (as opposed to follow this conversation to its conclusion).

If so then you can transfer the repository to me and I will later transfer it to the final destination once we know where that should be. I have been involved in such transfers many times. You should of course make sure that I can be trusted before transferring the repository to me. To do so you can check my involvement in Melpa (see https://github.com/melpa/melpa/graphs/contributors). I am also the maintainer of the Emacsmirror (https://github.com/emacsmirror) and the Emacs Orphanage (https://github.com/emacsorphanage). The latter is actually a place I have created for packages whose original....

... or you can just transfer to @phrb :grinning:

That's probably what I would do after some more deliberation.

By all means, it does not have to be transferred to me, I'm just taking initiative :smiley: I'm happy to contribute changes to someone else's repository.

I don't need to inject myself into this. I just wanted to make sure that @gjkerns can do this immediately and be done with it.

@gjkerns For due diligence you should check that @phrb should receive the repository. You can do that by going to the official org-contrib repository, where you can see that the Org maintainer agree that this should be so. https://git.sr.ht/~bzg/org-contrib/tree/master/item/lisp/ob-julia.el#L5

Hi everyone, Please note that @nico202 and @tecosaur have released a fork of ob-julia, which aims to be the official org-mode backend for Julia: https://github.com/nico202/ob-julia The good old ob-julia is deprecated for quite a long time, and cannot be used as of today. @tarsius, I think you should get in touch with them.

So it is still unclear who becomes the next maintainers. It would probably best if all "candidates" talked to each other and you then end up maintaining it as a team. But we just don't know yet what the outcome will be.

@gjkerns If you don't want to take part in the process of finding the next maintainer(s), then I think it would be best if you transferred the repository to me now.

Actually, the work recently made by @nico202 is not only a fork of the present repo, but also a whole refactoring of ob-julia. This fork works perfectly fine. But I don't really understand, since I thought @tecosaur was in charge of finding a new maintainer for ob-julia(and it is pretty clear that he found one). You should probably clarify that among the members of the org mode team.

To the best of my knowledge, @nico202 is currently the only "candidate" for the responsibility of being an ob-julia maintainer. I had maintained an "unofficial" fork of ob-julia for a very short time, but as of today, only @nico202 is actively working on this project.

I'm happy to help developing ob-julia wherever it ends up. I had volunteered to maintain it in a thread at the org-mode list where @bzg asked for volunteers. Since apparently no one else manifested interest in it at the time, I completed the FSF forms and registered as this file's maintainer on the savannah repository.

Hello :wave: with regards to the state of ob-julia: after discovering the current version was very borked, I went looking for a replacement and found Frédéric Santos' ob-ess-julia. However, when I asked about upstreaming it (ob-ess-julia#5) Frédéric recommended Nicolò's work be used instead. After contacting Nicolò he created nico202/ob-julia, and over April did a large chunk of work on it. It's currently in rather decent shape, supporting synchronous and asynchronous sessions, and a number of richer outputs. Nicolò has been rather busy as of late, and so I've been working on it most recently. You can see the TODO.org for a sense of where we are currently. Once this is in what I'd consider to be a "good state" I'd like to get this into Org proper, which I have already raised on the Org ML and received a positive response.

If ob-julia.el is to end up in Org's proper (a move I support, of course), we need to have at least one of its maintainers that signs the FSF papers.

That's why we exchanged with @phrb about him being the maintainer for the soon-to-be-included version and that's why he signed the FSF papers (thanks for that).

Whoever ends up being the FSF-signed maintainer, please advise the mailing list adding bzg@gnu.org in CC.

gjkerns / ob-julia

Please clarify upstream repository and license #20