Re: Moving some lisp/ob-*.el files to org-contrib - your advice?

[Tim Cross <theophilusx@gmail.com>]

Bastien <bzg@gnu.org> writes:

> Hi all,
>
> Less code is less bug and less maintainance.  So I'm considering
> moving these files to the new (unmaintained) org-contrib repo at
> https://git.sr.ht/~bzg/org-contrib:
>
> - ob-abc.el --- Org Babel Functions for ABC
> - ob-asymptote.el --- Babel Functions for Asymptote
> - ob-coq.el --- Babel Functions for Coq
> - ob-ditaa.el --- Babel Functions for ditaa
> - ob-ebnf.el --- Babel Functions for EBNF
> - ob-hledger.el --- Babel Functions for hledger
> - ob-J.el --- Babel Functions for J
> - ob-ledger.el --- Babel Functions for Ledger
> - ob-lilypond.el --- Babel Functions for Lilypond
> - ob-mscgen.el --- Babel Functions for Mscgen
> - ob-picolisp.el --- Babel Functions for Picolisp
> - ob-vala.el --- Babel functions for Vala evaluation
>
> I suggest a criterium for keeping ob*.el files in Org could be that
> the extension is known by Emacs _or_ that the supported language is
> well-established.
>

+1 on this and the list of proposed languages.

Do any of these ob-* files have FSF copyright i.e. author assigned
copyright to FSF. Just wondering, given the contrib package will live in
non-gnu repo, if this is something we need to be concerned about or not?

Strikes me there is nothing written in stone here, so if a language
becomes popular and it has maintainers, we can always review the
decision to move it 'out' and when justified, move back into core.

I think it is good having a clear distinction and the idea that if your
using a contrib package, it is 'best effort only' and not guaranteed to
work with the most recent org version compared to 'core', which has an
expectation it works with most recent org version.

-- 
Tim Cross