Re: [PATCH] ob-svgbob: New babel backend for SVGBob

[Bastien]

Hi Timothy,

> Thanks for taking a look at this. In light of your response I’m wondering 
> about
> the ob-* inclusion criteria. I recall when removal was being discussed the
> concerns being with ob-* libraries that were some combination of:
> ⁃ Too niche
> ⁃ Being actively maintained

I may be wrong, and perhaps many people are already using svgbob to
convert ASCII drawing to SVG, but I think it is too niche for being
part of Org core and Emacs core.

The questions I'd ask before including a Babel library in Org are*:

- Is the language supported in Emacs core?
- Is the language or tool widely used?

You don't need to score very high with *both* answer, but at least
one.  For example, ob-js.el qualifies because Javascript is supported
in Emacs and widely used.  ob-plantuml.el because, even though there
is no kind of "Emacs support", the tool is widely used.

I don't think svgbob is widely used enough (3K GitHub stars does not
say much about the real use).

There is no harm in not being included in Org, such useful libraries
can live in GNU or NonGNU ELPA and still reach their audience.

WDYT?

* Given these criteria, I'm inclined to add ob-stan.el to the list
  of Babel libary that should probably move outside of Org core.

-- 
 Bastien

Re: [PATCH] ob-svgbob: New babel backend for SVGBob

[Timothy]

Hi  Bastien,

> Not later than a few hours ago, I removed several ob-* files:
> 
>
> (ob-svgbob.el should not go in org-contrib, though, because the
> org-contrib repo is for unmaintained libraries.)
>
> I suggest you maintain ob-svgbob.el as a contributed library to
> GNU ELPA () to help people find it. See the
> instructions here:
>
> 

Thanks for taking a look at this. In light of your response I’m wondering about
the ob-* inclusion criteria. I recall when removal was being discussed the
concerns being with ob-* libraries that were some combination of:
⁃ Too niche
⁃ Being actively maintained

Which is why I thought SVGBob could be a good fit, as it’s a small useful
general-purpose tool that only takes ~50 lines of code for a library (and so I’d
be quite happy to maintain) and IMO fits in nicely with Org.

Would you mind elaborating a bit more on your thoughts on what makes an ob-*
library a good fit for Org or not?

All the best,
Timothy

Re: [PATCH] ob-svgbob: New babel backend for SVGBob

[Bastien]

Hi Steven,

thank you very much for proposing this addition!

While I personally love it (and find the svgbob-editor demo very
impressive), we are in the process of restricting the ob-* files
that we include in Org's core and in GNU Emacs.

Not later than a few hours ago, I removed several ob-* files:
https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/org-mode.git/commit/?id=db67c7e9

(ob-svgbob.el should not go in org-contrib, though, because the
org-contrib repo is for unmaintained libraries.)

I suggest you maintain ob-svgbob.el as a contributed library to
GNU ELPA (https://elpa.gnu.org) to help people find it. See the
instructions here:

https://git.savannah.gnu.org/cgit/emacs/elpa.git/plain/README

How does that sound?

-- 
 Bastien