Am 13.07.2015 um 21:48 schrieb David Carlisle:
> On 13/07/2015 20:37, Stephan Hennig wrote:
>>
>> I'm in favour of a format-neutral package, which is pulled into the
>> (LaTeX) format.  It's a trade-off between format maintainer's and
>> package contributor's burden.  From the point of view of a format
>> maintainer, there a danger such centrally shared package being less
>> stable than desired.  But let's see.  If a format-agnostic allocation
>> package doesn't work out (technically or socially), any format
>> maintainers can fork that package later still.  Why fork today?
> 
> Hopefully there doesn't have to be a fork,

Well, what is a fork?  For me, feature duplication is one defining
characteristic of a fork.

But I might well have misunderstood your approach.  If basic LaTeX
resource allocation is only used internally and not targeting at package
authors (with one exception), I'm fine.  The one exception being the
luatexbase package, which provides format independent allocation
functions, but builds upon the LaTeX implementation for that format
(because there can be only one).  Third-party package authors always
refer to the luatexbase API instead of the LaTeX API for resource
allocation.  Is that near what you have in mind?

Best regards,
Stephan Hennig