emacs-git-email: Guix policy for dealing with abandoned packages with active forks (was: [bug#74231] QA review for 74231)

[Suhail Singh <suhailsingh247@gmail.com>]

Cayetano Santos <csantosb@inventati.org> writes:

>>> To note that this is a completely different beast compared to previous
>>> package (repo, version and mantainer).
>>
>> Yes.  Please let me know in case the commit message needs to be revised
>> (it already does note that we are changing the referenced fork).  The
>> previous fork hasn't been updated in a couple of years and had a number
>> of bugs that have since been resolved in the updated fork.
>
> To me, the open question goes well beyond this package.
>
> Does guix package forks of code from a couple of years ago, without an
> explicit acknowledgement between maintainers ?

The maintainer has not been active on their own mailing list
(<https://lists.sr.ht/~yoctocell/git-email-devel>) for a while despite
repeated discussions about outstanding issues ([1], [2]).  I believe it
would be fair to characterize the original package as having been
abandoned.

I'm CC-ing Xinglu Chen (the original author) to this email for
transparency.

> Additionally, this is a second generation fork ...

I am not sure I understand what you mean by "second generation" in this
regard.  Could you please elaborate?

If you're referring to the fact that it used another contributor's
(Mekeor) fork as a starting point, then for context please note that the
decision to treat my fork as "upstream" was in discussion with them
(since Mekeor's no longer actively using the package).

I'm CC-ing Mekeor to this message for transparency.

> I’d say, better bring the question to guix-devel, as this has large
> implications. There must be a policy already around this point.

I'm CC-ing guix-devel.


[1]: <https://lists.sr.ht/~yoctocell/git-email-devel/%3C87wn1zlhfq.fsf@posteo.de%3E>

[2]: <https://lists.sr.ht/~yoctocell/git-email-devel/%3Ccc4a1b8b-9a1d-46cf-9b04-466c85ebcd44@riseup.net%3E>

-- 
Suhail