Skip to content

Link to Maintainers from each package's hackage page #637

New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Closed
ivanperez-keera opened this issue Oct 22, 2017 · 10 comments
Closed

Link to Maintainers from each package's hackage page #637

ivanperez-keera opened this issue Oct 22, 2017 · 10 comments

Comments

@ivanperez-keera
Copy link

ivanperez-keera commented Oct 22, 2017

Each package has a maintainer, declared in the cabal file (e.g. [1]). Each package has a list of maintainers authorised to make changes to it on hackage (e.g. [2]).

It would be a nice small addition if there was a link from the former to the latter (from [1] to [2]).

[1] https://hackage.haskell.org/package/Yampa/
[2] https://hackage.haskell.org/package/Yampa/maintainers/

EDIT: clarification.

@hvr
Copy link
Member

hvr commented Oct 22, 2017

@ivanperez-keera can you maybe create a mockup of the UI? I've had considered this too, but I couldn't come up with a UI design that wouldn't be somewhat weird, as the maintainer-group and the .cabal declared maintainer(s) have a bit of an impedance mismatch, being in a different format/namespace.

@ivanperez-keera
Copy link
Author

@hvr What I had in mind was super-simple. For example:
screenshot from 2017-10-23 01-09-04

@hvr
Copy link
Member

hvr commented Oct 23, 2017

@ivanperez-keera ok, that's easy enough; and you see no problem if the .cabal maintainer field has completely diverged from the hackage-maintainer-group?

@ivanperez-keera
Copy link
Author

ivanperez-keera commented Oct 23, 2017

  • Sure, it may be a bit confusing that they can diverge. And those being different is not always an indication of a problem. When both are real persons, then a reasonable expectation would be that the intersection of both not be empty. However, maintainers may not be real persons. For example, the "cabal" maintainer email might be a mailing list. And the "hackage" maintainer account might correspond to Travis CI.

    A possibility to hint that this could happen would be to use a different word instead of details, such as 'official list', 'all', 'list' or 'hackage maintainers'.

  • The other, maybe less confusing option would be to add it at the bottom, in the current Maintainer's corner. It might require renaming the section so that it fits semantically.

@gbaz
Copy link
Contributor

gbaz commented Jan 28, 2018

I think the bottom is a good idea. That's where I'd expect it, actually.

@gbaz
Copy link
Contributor

gbaz commented Apr 1, 2018

Note -- there's a little work that needs to be done to thread the data through to where it needs to go, as the maintainers group isn't normally available to that page directly.

@andreasabel
Copy link
Member

andreasabel commented Apr 12, 2023

@ivanperez-keera : Are you happy with today's status quo?
https://hackage.haskell.org/package/Yampa-0.14.2

Screenshot 2023-04-12 at 22 04 39

@ulysses4ever
Copy link
Contributor

I find it weird that it goes under "Maintainer's Corner". But at least it's there…

@ivanperez-keera
Copy link
Author

ivanperez-keera commented Apr 13, 2023

I agree, the UI/UX could be improved, but at least there is something. We can close it if you want. Thanks.

@andreasabel
Copy link
Member

Fixed by #1098.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

5 participants