Re: OT: mail-based interfaces and web-based interfaces (Re: Extract

From: Eric Wong <normalperson@yhbt.net>
Date: Jul 26, 2012, 03:10 UTC
Message-ID: <20120726031048.GA8034@dcvr.yhbt.net>
In-Reply-To: <5010AC7B.6020805@pobox.com>

Michael G Schwern <schwern@pobox.com> wrote:

Show 14 quoted lines

> On 2012.7.25 4:48 PM, Eric Wong wrote:
> > We need to use something.  Right now our choice of mailer is the best
> > choice for _existing_ contributors.
> 
> I believe this entire discussion can be reduced to that right there.
> 
> If your process is optimized for existing contributors, it will work well for
> existing contributors, who will want to optimize it for themselves.  Repeat.
> If the main way you evaluate your process is asking "is this more convenient
> for me" then you're probably in that spiral.
> 
> This creates a process very well tuned to the existing contributors, and its
> very convenient for them.  But the consequence is it becomes more and more
> work for a new contributor to join.

The process is _not_ a lot of work. At least no more than any other project: observe the regulars -> imitate the regulars

Many/most regular git contributors are not Linux kernel developers, yet were able to quickly able to get up-to-speed with git. AFAIK, the Linux kernel gets plenty of new contributors every year, too.

> Before talking about anything else, the existing contributors have to ask
> themselves a simple question:  Do we care about getting new contributors?

Yes, if contributors are willing to learn/respect existing conventions. We do take time to help new contributors out :)

For me, it's certainly "no" if there's any endorsement of non-Free Software or centralized/commercial services involved.

> The answer can be "no" ("yes, but not if I'm inconvenienced" is a no).  Maybe
> you're happy with the people you've got.  But there's no point in getting into
> detail until that's settled.