[tei-council] Criteria for TEI Repository Inclusion

[Martin Holmes]

James Cummings wrote:
> Martin Holmes wrote:
>> My feeling is that the only subprojects that should end up on the TEI SF 
>> site are ones which are sponsored/maintained by an official SIG. If the 
>> SIG disbands or becomes moribund (no activity for a year, say), then the 
>> customization should be moved to an archive area as soon as a problem 
>> appears with it (for instance, if an update to TEI breaks something in 
>> the customization, or a bug emerges that no-one is willing to fix).
> 
> Would another option be to have a separate repository for TEI-SIG 
> (i.e. contrib of a specialised sort) and have it administered by 
> the SIG coordinator?

That makes sense to me. The main thing we want to avoid is to be seen to 
be endorsing customizations over which we have no control, in which we 
have no interest, or which no-one is competent to update or fix. 
Anything in SF has the implicit blessing of the TEI, and users who adopt 
such customizations may have a reasonable expectation that the Council 
or TEI-L will provide some help and support for them. If that's not the 
case, then we'll end up confusing and disappointing users, and that's 
not good for anyone.

I also like the idea of attaching someone's name to each contribution in 
a separate repository. The SIG coordinator is a good option. If the 
person responsible later repudiates the responsibility, and no-one steps 
up to take it over, then it's reasonable to move it into a different 
type of archive.

Cheers,
Martin
-- 
Martin Holmes
University of Victoria Humanities Computing and Media Centre
(mholmes at uvic.ca)
Half-Baked Software, Inc.
(mholmes at halfbakedsoftware.com)
martin at mholmes.com