Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add repology badge to README #6305

Closed
wants to merge 1 commit into from

Conversation

Sija
Copy link
Contributor

@Sija Sija commented Jun 30, 2018

SSIA

@Sija Sija changed the title Add repology badge to README.md [ci skip] Add repology badge to README Jun 30, 2018
@j8r
Copy link
Contributor

j8r commented Jul 10, 2018

Why the site says that Crystal is absent from the Alpine Linux Edge repository? This isn't the case.

@Sija
Copy link
Contributor Author

Sija commented Jul 11, 2018

@j8r It's there, but under the name of crystal. not anymore, see #6305 (comment).

@AMDmi3
Copy link

AMDmi3 commented Jul 13, 2018

The package naming discrepancy has been sorted out - all relevant packages are now under crystal-lang.

@RX14
Copy link
Contributor

RX14 commented Jul 13, 2018

Not sure really this is that useful to users. I'd rather not sling in every badge under the sun into the readme.

@Sija
Copy link
Contributor Author

Sija commented Jul 14, 2018

@RX14 This PR contains 1 (one) badge, not every badge under the sun, and IMHO it's informational enough to include it in the README. Thank you.

@RX14
Copy link
Contributor

RX14 commented Jul 15, 2018

@Sija as a maintainer I have to think about the big picture. If we merge one badge for a service which is unused by crystal core devs, i.e. "unofficial", people will use this PR as an excuse to merge more badges like this in the future. I think the badges should stay minimal and be links to official channels or services.

This service is cool, but unlike all the other badges (except maybe the code triage one), it's not officially part of the crystal workflow. We use travis and circle for CI so they should be there, gitter and bountysource are official channels. Repology is something I've never even heard of before.

@AMDmi3
Copy link

AMDmi3 commented Jul 15, 2018

I'd agree that the badges should stay minimal, however note that badges are not only useful to project developers but also to users and newcomers, so it makes sense to inform them that the project is well packaged in many distro repositories.

Honestly I don't find this particular type of badge too useful for this purpose, but somebody does as there was a request to add it to Repology. There are other types of badges too, maybe the big one could be more useful somewhere in the installation documentation section.

@straight-shoota
Copy link
Member

Installation instructions are provided in the docs. That's where people should be pointed for installing Crystal. Maybe it would make sense to include a link to Repology there, but a badge isn't too helpful, actually.

@AMDmi3
Copy link

AMDmi3 commented Jul 16, 2018

Installation instructions are provided in the docs. That's where people should be pointed for installing Crystal.

  • It doesn't hive any hint on how recent version you will get
  • It doesn't cover all the repositories

@straight-shoota
Copy link
Member

@AMDmi3 Yes, the installation instructions are nowhere complete. But let's focus on fixing that instead of simply adding some batches to the readme.

@Sija
Copy link
Contributor Author

Sija commented Jul 20, 2018

Would GitHub release badge be regarded as useful?

GitHub release

@j8r
Copy link
Contributor

j8r commented Sep 8, 2018

More ideas taken from the Nim's README:

The IRC channel can also be mentioned.

@jhass
Copy link
Member

jhass commented Dec 11, 2019

It seems like there's little to no interest to this from any core member. Let's close this :)

@asterite asterite closed this Dec 11, 2019
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

None yet

7 participants