RE: [tpop3d-discuss]tpop3d needs fork?

[Giampaolo Tomassoni]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: address@hidden [mailto:tpop3d-discuss-
> address@hidden On Behalf Of Richard Smith
> 
> I can guarantee that the repository isn't going to be
> deleted.  The machine on which it is hosted is owned by an
> ISP, Mythic Beasts, that Chris co-founded, and as we use
> tpop3d heavily it's not in our interest to delete the cvs
> repository!  In fact, we (Mythic Beasts) will gladly
> continue to host the project.
> 
> > Does anyone have copy of server side tpop3d cvs repository?
> > (pserver:address@hidden:/home/chris/vcvs/repos)
> 
> Yes.  We can make this available.
> 
> I'm currently discussing with some of Chris' other friends
> and colleagues what we think he would have wished to happen
> to the code base, and we'd welcome comments here.
> For example, whether we should attempt to formally hand over
> maintainership to someone, or simply allow the code to fork.

I understand and endorse your attempts to follow any wishes from Chris.
Unfortunately, whatever Chris preferred would have a meaning if Chris was
still with us. I eventually see that the only sensible wish from Chris we
have to respect about the tpop3d code is that it has to be open-source,
GPL-licensed code.

That said, until Chris was the only maintainer of the tpop3d's code, it was
reasonable to keep the repository were he could easily handle it. But now, I
think that the repository will be located where the new maintainer will
decide it has to be, provided it will still be accessible by everybody.

We have to seek for a new maintainer, first. Further details will surely get
fixed then.

I personally don't see why we would need to fork the tpop3d project: we
better keep a record of Chris' work on tpop3d by not changing the project
name. 


> Also whether the project is still being actively developed,
> or is now in bug-fix mode.  (My impression is that Chris
> considered it to be the latter.)

This is one of the points I don't think we have to fix. What Chris would
have decided if tpop3d could implement some new, appealing feature?

Please note I'm not meaning tpop3d has to experience some kind of code
revolution: I don't see why. I simply mean that the new maintainer will be
called to decide if a new feature is to be implemented into tpop3d or not.
Decisions like this are part of the job of a maintainer.

Giampaolo


> Richard Smith
> 
> _______________________________________________
> tpop3d-discuss mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://lists.beasts.org/mailman/listinfo/tpop3d-discuss