Migrating this repo to lunarmodules

[Tieske]

I have set up a maintainer team for this repo, and added @teto.

@hishamhm can you move the luarocks entry over to the "lunarmodules"?
@alerque can you add the lunarmodules apikey as a secret so the automated deployment can be set up?

[hishamhm]

Just doing due diligence: since the original upstream has had a commit in 2021 which is not THAT long ago (for Lua project timescales), do we have the blessing from @ittner and @jonringer, or was it not possible to contact them?

[teto]

@jonringer is not the maintainer of lua-iconv he was just the last one able to get a PR merged. In luarocks/luarocks-site#199 (comment) I linked a ticket to peterbillam I could not find his correct contact (the mail bounced back). As for mimetypes, I opened this ticket and sent an email too lunarmodules#8, both without answers.

[jonringer]

I give full freedom to use any contribution for lua-iconv I've done under any license.

[teto]

also on @Tieske 's suggestion, I asked on the mailing list http://lua-users.org/lists/lua-l/2023-09/msg00058.html

[hishamhm]

@hishamhm can you move the luarocks entry over to the "lunarmodules"?

Done migrating the LuaRocks entry! @teto, thanks for all the pointers above!

[ittner]

Well, it seems a great idea as I didn't had enough time to update lua-iconv for while. I'm assuming the idea is to have lua-iconv repos under lunarmodules organization, so we can have a shared maintainership with multiple commit rights? That's Ok for me. Perhaps a next step will be marking ittner/lua-iconv as read-only and point the repo here. Then alert distros to update their packages.

[teto]

@ittner great ! I hope the move didn't feel offensive. I didn't plan to do any code change, I just wanted to fix the rockspec as mentioned in the ticket and then I was it seemed like a better signal to move the repo altogether. If you feel happy with the shared maintainership let's add you to the repo. If you prefer to rollback, well it's brand new so that wont do much harm ^^

[Tieske]

I'm assuming the idea is to have lua-iconv repos under lunarmodules organization, so we can have a shared maintainership with multiple commit rights? That's Ok for me.

yes, see here

Perhaps a next step will be marking ittner/lua-iconv as read-only and point the repo here. Then alert distros to update their packages.

@ittner that would be a good idea. I've invited you as a maintainer to the team.

@alerque can you also change the homepage on the luarocks site? to point to the new lunarmodules repo location.

[alerque]

I'm happy to help setup the machinery, but before we do is there any chance we could swap this fork out in favor of transferring the original repository? Since @ittner is around, once they accept the invite to join the org here they should be able to transfer the original repository. This will have many advantages including adding redirect links from all the old repository locations, bug links, downloads, etc. It will also help people in the future find the canonical one since GitHub consistently demotes forks in search results in favor of originals.

I think this fork will need to be renamed or deleted in order to make room in the namespace for an actual transfer.

[Tieske]

+1 to that

[ittner]

@teto:

@ittner great ! I hope the move didn't feel offensive. I didn't plan to do any code change, I just wanted to fix the rockspec as mentioned in the ticket and then I was it seemed like a better signal to move the repo altogether. If you feel happy with the shared maintainership let's add you to the repo. If you prefer to rollback, well it's brand new so that wont do much harm ^^

No offense, at all. I would say it's the opposite, way better if we are able to join efforts.

@alerque:

I'm happy to help setup the machinery, but before we do is there any chance we could swap this fork out in favor of transferring the original repository? Since @ittner is around, once they accept the invite to join the org here they should be able to transfer the original repository. This will have many advantages including adding redirect links from all the old repository locations, bug links, downloads, etc. It will also help people in the future find the canonical one since GitHub consistently demotes forks in search results in favor of originals.

I think this fork will need to be renamed or deleted in order to make room in the namespace for an actual transfer.

I was worried about redirects, specially because distro packages point to my repo, but the solution seems already here. Once this repo is renamed (but it'll be nice to keep it to preserve this issue) I'll transfer the original repo here.

[teto]

is it done already ? (dunno if it's github transitive fork system or if you already did that:)

[hishamhm]

No, when the repo is transferred it does not appear as a fork. Also this issue and comments won't appear there as they will stay here in the to-be-deleted fork

[Tieske]

@ittner I renamed this module. Can you transfer now?

[ittner]

Just did it ... It should appear for approval now.

[alerque]

It seems to have come across. Lets more further discussion of adjusting the repo to the new repo.