Move Cake.SimpleGitVer to cake-contributors

[JeroenVandezande]

Hi,

I would like to move (have) the Cake.SimpleGitVer to the cake-contributors organization. I am the owner of the repo and I already am part of the cake-contributors organization.

[JeroenVandezande]

I wonder why the webcrawler is not picking up https://www.nuget.org/packages/Cake.SimpleGitVer/

[Jericho]

The tool we wrote to scan NuGet for Cake addins, modules and recipes runs on a twelve hour schedule (meaning it runs twice a day). That's why there might be a few hour delay between when a given addin is published and the moment it gets analyzed by our tool. Your addin was published 4 months ago therefore the "few hours delay" is not the issue with your particular addin.

To opt-in the tool's analysis process, a given addin must follow the Cake.xxx naming convention where Cake. is a hard-coded prefix our tool is looking for and xxx is the unique name that describes your addin. Addins that don't follow this naming convention will not be analyzed by our tool. In your case, your addin follows the convention so it's not an issue.

Our tool scans new versions of all addins and determines if they follow some of the documented best practices (such as: do they target the recommended .net TFMs?, do the use the recommended icon?, etc. These are just two examples off the top of my head) and spits out a markdown report with simplified data for easy viewing on the GitHub web site and an Excel report with detailed data for offline viewing. You can see that your addin is indeed included in the reports by looking at the markdown report summary and clicking on view the report for Cake 6.0.0. Addins are listed alphabetically so it should be easy to find your addin. Similarly, you can click on Click here to download the Excel spreadsheet in the report summary to verify that your addin has indeed been analyzed. As far as I can tell, this is working perfectly fine for your addin.

Finally, our tool generates a YAML file containing metadata about a given addin and raises an issue and submits a PR in the Cake web site's repo. Once the PR has been reviewed and accepted by a member of the team, the YAML file is used whenever Cake's online documentation is refreshed. This is the problem with your addin: the issue that was raised by our tool on January 9 2026 is still open and its corresponding PR hasn't been merged. This explains why the YAML for your addin is not being included in the documentation refresh process.

Sometimes this is done intentionally: maybe the person reviewing the PR wants more info from the addin author, for instance I've seen cases where an addin appeared to be a duplicate and the reviewer wanted to verify whether there was an opportunity to merge the new addin with the existing one. I have seen cases where the reviewer tried to contact the addin author and never received an answer; in such cases the PR remains open indefinitely and the addin never shows up on the Cake web site. Maybe someone tried to contact you but, for some reason, wasn't able to reach you? Typically when this happens, the reviewer will add a note on the issue and/or the PR saying they attempted to contact the addin author but I don't see that in your case so I can't tell if someone tried to contact you or not.

Or it could be a simple oversight: someone might have simply forgoten to merge the PR. I am not involved in the review and approval process so I can't answer with authority.

@pascalberger are you able to help? Do you know why the PR for Cake.SimpleGitVer is still open?

[JeroenVandezande]

Hi Cake team,

Just bumping this once: is the cake-contributors / Cake Contrib onboarding process still active for new add-ins?

I’m already part of the organization and would like to move Cake.SimpleGitVer there, but if new add-ins are no longer being accepted or the process has changed, I’ll keep maintaining it under my own account.

Also, the package is available on NuGet here: https://www.nuget.org/packages/Cake.SimpleGitVer/ — but it does not seem to be picked up by the extension crawler. Is there a metadata/tagging requirement I’m missing?

Thanks!

[patriksvensson]

@gep13 Do you know what needs to be done?