Skip to content

Conversation

@tetrapharmakon
Copy link
Contributor

Hi @mroman42! The new CLS essentially works.

By essentially we mean that it compiles flawlessly with all old papers but our "Profunctor Optics". 😆

@tetrapharmakon
Copy link
Contributor Author

Hi, it's basically done now.

The last bit of information to proceed is:

  1. Who will appear as author of the cls?
  2. Who will be the maintainer? (presumably the same person as 1? also, this will probably determine whose CTAN account has to be used for publications)
  3. What is the desired process for the releases and publication on CTAN? Right now there is none. It may be nice to have an automated process in CI triggered by version tags. An alternative would be to document it and trust the maintainer to take care of that manually.
  4. Do you have any other question?

@mroman42
Copy link
Member

mroman42 commented May 21, 2024

Hi Fosco and Paolo, thanks.

Does "Profunctor optics" work with this version?

  1. I believe it is best to use a collective name and that it is someone on behalf of the journal that submits it, if only because it keeps institutionally: people comes and goes, and it is the Compositionality journal that should be managing its template. CTAN seems to be fine with collective names (e.g. the Japanese TeX Development Community).
  2. It seems best that we use Compositionality's account (compositionalityjournal@gmail.com) and that, once this is merged, that account publishes the main branch of this repository.
  3. Both the CI and the manual maintenance would need someone to take care of them. The executive board's volunteers are probably expected to take care of this. It cannot depend on any single person, so the simpler, the better.

GitHub complains that draft pull requests cannot be merged. Whenever the pull request is ready to merge, someone from the executive—I am guessing that will be me unless someone else volunteers—should review it, check that the chief editors are happy with it, and then merge and publish it on CTAN. It may be that we prefer to wait until a bit later to make it the official version of the template (say, until the next issue, just for consistency).

Thanks again.

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.

3 participants