Should ownership of XLSX.jl transfer to JuliaData?

XLSX.jl seems to be a well used package. It has 298 stars on GitHub, for example. Unfortunately, the package owner seems no longer to be active, and so active maintenance of the package has more or less stopped.

Excel is a key tool for many data analysts. Having tools to use Excel in Julia seems to me to be a valuable part of the proposition to these potential users. People (like me) who are never going to be using the advanced numerical computing tools Julia is so good at can still get huge value from using Julia in their day to day work. I know I do. I see XLSX.jl as a possible on-ramp for new Julia users who might otherwise naturally step on from Excel to Python.

It seems to me, for whom XLSX.jl is a core tool in daily use, that it would be something of a shame for it gradually to fall by the wayside. So I wonder if it could usefully be transferred into the custody of JuliaData?

I don’t want to step on the toes of @felipenoris, the current package owner, who did a great job developing the package over its first 5-10 years of existence. But if they are no longer able to maintain the package, putting it under the JuliaData umbrella seems like it might be a good option.

I myself don’t really want to become the package owner - even if that were a possibliity - but I’m quite happy for the time being to continue to make PRs to support its development.

What do others think?

8 Likes

Agree

I think it is in general a good idea to move packages, especially when they are used by several people/projects, to an org; that makes maintenance easier and improves the Bus factor - Wikipedia. So I do agree on that – it is of course still Felipe who should have a say in that as well.

2 Likes

That it would be best to approach the package owner first, preferably in private, and only open a discussion about this if you get no response within a reasonable timeframe.

Keep in mind that this is not a community decision, or something we should vote about. It’s someone’s work, and the process involves them anyway, so why not start with that step?

Also, given that are 10+ commits in September 2025, I think it is unreasonable to claim that

2 Likes

Yes, I’ve tried several times over the past year to approach Felipe but have never had any response.

Also, given that are 10+ commits in September 2025, I think it is unreasonable

Well, yes. That work was done by me. The commit was prompted by an intermediary who, I understand, may know Felipe personally.

Sorry, I don’t see what the issue is. Your previous PRs did get merged, I see you have outstanding ones, 3 and 4 weeks old, but that’s not a long time in FOSS.

Note that if you want to use your contributions before they are merged, Pkg has a mechanism for it.

1 Like

I do agree with Tamas here. We can all be of the same opinion, but in the end it is Felipes decision, both whether he wants to transfer the package but also whether he wants to comment on questions even. He might have own opinions or reasons for why he is doing what he is doing and that is totally fine.

2 Likes

OK. I can see I may be a little impatient. I’m a relatively new contributor in the FOSS world and obviously haven’t yet properly calibrated what seems a long time to me to what actually is a long time in reality. :wink:

Presumably, this is only true up to a point. In the end, we might agree that the community should take ownership of the package. We just aren’t at that point yet.

I agree that generally packages like this should live in an org. I’m happy to help facilitate transferring the package to JuliaData (I can give rights to felipenoris) and then we can discuss more general maintenance/admin permissions for whoever should be added. I sometimes miss email/discourse notifications, so if there’s interest in moving forward, pinging me on the Julia slack is usually the best way to get a direct response and I can facilitate.

5 Likes