What's the "right" way to abandon an open source package?

Mark Lawrence breamoreboy at yahoo.co.uk
Wed Jul 2 06:57:17 CEST 2014


On 02/07/2014 00:18, Ben Finney wrote:
> Skip Montanaro <skip at python.org> writes:
>
>> I've tried to find people to take it over, but so far unsuccessfully.
>
> The principle (laid out by ESR in “The Cathedral and the Bazaar”) is:
>
>      When you lose interest in a program, your last duty to it is to hand
>      it off to a competent successor.
>
>      <URL:http://www.catb.org/~esr/writings/cathedral-bazaar/cathedral-bazaar/ar01s02.html>
>
> Whether successful or not, I can testify that Skip has been
> conscientious in following this principle: he has been asking parties
> who have demonstrated interest and/or competence for some time now to
> take over maintenance of the ‘lockfile’ library.
>
>> I continue to get bug reports, some from OS package maintainers or
>> maintainers of applications which use lockfile. Lots of these people
>> seem demanding of my time (which makes me even less interested in
>> lockfile maintenance).
>
> I don't know of any good way to make those decrease, without some other
> contact point for the project becoming more prominent than yours.
>
>> Is there a "correct" way to abandon the damn thing?
>
> You have, IMO, already put in sufficient public effort to give
> opportunity to potential maintainers.
>
> I would say that, in the case of the ‘lockfile’ library, you have
> already discharged your responsibilities under the above principle; and
> can politely let each person know they are on their own for maintenance.
>

Very well put.  Kudos to Skip and yourself :)


-- 
My fellow Pythonistas, ask not what our language can do for you, ask 
what you can do for our language.

Mark Lawrence

---
This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.
http://www.avast.com





More information about the Python-list mailing list