[racket] deprecating planet version using para. in planet description?

On Fri, Dec 6, 2013 at 9:26 AM, Neil Van Dyke <neil at neilvandyke.org> wrote:

>  Robby Findler wrote at 12/06/2013 09:38 AM:
>
>
>
>>
>>  You could also remove it from both planet repositories to just hide it
>> from planet depending on your desire to support older versions of racket.
>>
>>
>>  Wouldn't that break all code that has a direct or indirect dependency on
>> any version of that PLaneT package?
>>
>>
>  Yes. I should have been more clear: there are a number of packages on
> planet that currently just don't work and for which there are new package
> system variants. Depending on the authors' intentions to support those
> planet packages, this may be a good idea. I'm specifically thinking about
> authors that expect only newcomers to come across them and then to get
> broken code and they would rather those newcomers just didn't find the
> planet packages and instead found the new package system's code, this might
> be a viable approach.
>
>
> All these years, I have had a different assumption of what it means for a
> package or version to be added to the PLaneT server.  If a package or
> version was there at some point, then I would still expect it to still be
> there, even if it doesn't work with the latest versions of Racket or other
> things.
>
> From my perspective, removing packages from PLaneT because one is not able
> to maintain them (or perhaps wants to maintain them only in the new package
> system, as you mention) doesn't seem like a great idea.  I'd rather see
> appropriate use of documentation and metadata to indicate that, say, the
> package does not work with current versions of Racket or that it is no
> longer being maintained.
>
> (The only cases in which I'd currently expect to see a version (not a
> package) removed from PLaneT are if it was found to have a showstopper
> security vulnerability, someone accidentally leaked very sensitive info
> into the ".plt", or there was a court order.)
>
> As a practical matter, if others think that casually removing packages
> from PLaneT is OK, then I'll just change how I use PLaneT accordingly,
> rather than try to change people's minds.  However, I do suspect that that
> kind of measure erodes credibility a little, for practical and research
> purposes.
>
>

We definitely had the intention that packages should not be removed from
planet when we first designed it. There was some backlast against that and
so that position has softened a little bit.

I do think that leaving things up there and updating the
metadata/documentation/etc is a better approach too.

Thanks for saying this.

Robby
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.racket-lang.org/users/archive/attachments/20131206/5f3bae5a/attachment.html>