emacs-devel
[Top][All Lists]
Advanced

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: New maintainer


From: Przemysław Wojnowski
Subject: Re: New maintainer
Date: Wed, 7 Oct 2015 20:49:39 +0200
User-agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.3.0

W dniu 07.10.2015 o 17:27, Eli Zaretskii pisze:
It's not that we didn't try before.  The best result we could come up
with is in etc/TODO.  It's an undeservedly forgotten resource.
Didn't know that such file exist. Thanks!
It definitely should have more exposure, especially "Simple tasks"
section. How about mentioning it in etc/CONTRIBUTE?.

What I found strange is that the following file has different content:
http://www.gnu.org/software/emacs/CONTRIBUTE

Based on that maintainers would be able to plan releases with features
from a roadmap - with consensus with developers. Maybe not many features
would make it into the next release. Maybe just one of them.

This assumes that there will be some sufficient correlation between
the roadmap and the significant features being developed each year.
However, such an assumption will only hold if the roadmap is
coordinated with the existing developers before it becomes official.
Yes. Keep in mind that nothing is welded and can change for various reason, the roadmap too. But at least it's a plan (starting point).

[roadmap] would make it clear what we want and were are we going
(the vision). It would also make developers to focus on the next
release.

That's the hope, but it won't happen by itself, IME.

For this reason, we have been doing until now the exact opposite:
decided on a major release when enough significant new features became
available.  I cannot say it worked badly, btw.  You can review the
major releases and see for yourself.
Maybe it's a good approach.

Nobody wants to work on a project that goes nowhere. There always
have to be some goal.

I don't think there could be _a_ goal for Emacs.  It will always be
quite a few significant ones, and then many more less significant, but
still important ones.  In this sense, there's no single direction in
which Emacs is, or should be going.
Well, IMHO some goals could be defined, for example "Provide IDE
features for language X (maybe unified) to make a programmer
productive". To achieve that some smaller goals would need to be
achieved, for example:
- provide project support (notion of project, maybe unified project API
  for different languages, debugger, etc.)
- provide refactoring tools for language(s) X (Y/Z)
- etc.

It could be divided into yet smaller goals until they finish in "Simple
tasks" section . ;-)

[...] strong tests

1. Write unit tests to learn how Emacs works.
It's clear, very easy to do, very good for newcomers, and brings value
to Emacs. :-)
It was not a joke. Writing tests is a very good way to learn how things
work.

Besides, "more tests" is hardly a development direction, it's a means
to an end.
I've written "strong tests", which is not the same. But to be clear,
the goal is to have enough test to change Emacs safely, without a fear
of introducing new bugs (of course that will always happen, but with
"strong tests" they are very limited). Such tests allow to build
deployment pipeline and be able to release Emacs on every commit that
pass the pipeline. IMHO this can be a goal.


Anyway, the beauty of Agile Software Development is its adaptability.
Such teams try different things to improve their development process.
Things that don't work are refined or rejected. It's like evolution.
IMHO Emacs community could try to apply such process. :-)

Reality check: we are not a team, in the Agile development sense.
Yes. The point here is constant improvement. Being open on new things ,
trying them and adapting what works. It doesn't have to be constrained
only to the Agile teams.

I just don't
think it could relieve the workload of the head maintainer and the
resulting burn-out, which is what you were suggesting, AFAIU.
IMHO working on a concrete release would constraint number of topics
and decisions to make, which would relieve the workload.

I don't believe we will be able to constrain contributors to "working
on a release".  Just watch the pressure we have every time we declare
a feature freeze to cut a release branch and end the freeze.
Maybe you're right. It was just an idea.

Here are other ideas:
1. Constraint maintenance term (for example 3 years)
No need.  Someone who feels burnt out will step down.  Someone who
don't, and does a good job, should be allowed to proceed.
Maybe. It was just an idea how not to loose valuable people. Maybe
someone else will have a better one.

2. Cut off-topics and end with action items.
Cutting off-topics should be done be everyone on the list. It creates a
flood of, maybe interesting, but irrelevant to the main topic, messages.

This is not a job with bosses and employees.  There are no means for
anyone here, including the head maintainer, to shut anyone up or force
them to stop discussing something.  Trying to do that wastes energy
and does little else.
Sorry. Seems that there's a misunderstanding. I don't want to "shut up"
anyone, but just ask for moving "off-topics" to new threads - "Please
discuss X in a separate thread."

Unrelated messages make it very hard to follow the main thread.
Even this topic has a number of unrelated threads (politics, keylogger,
mac os, compiler support, etc.). How that help to find a "New
maintainer"?

There's nothing you can do against that.
Well, I can ask to discuss other topics in a new threads. Being polite
doesn't hurt.

Cheers,
Przemysław



reply via email to

[Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread]