[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: State of the GNUnion 2020
From: |
Andy Wingo |
Subject: |
Re: State of the GNUnion 2020 |
Date: |
Mon, 17 Feb 2020 21:37:55 +0100 |
User-agent: |
Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/26.3 (gnu/linux) |
Hello Eli :)
On Wed 12 Feb 2020 19:13, Eli Zaretskii <eliz@gnu.org> writes:
>> From: DJ Delorie <dj@delorie.com>
>> Are we DONE producing that operating system? No? If not, why not?
>> Aren't all those developers who finished their packages working on
>> other, new packages? Why aren't the package counts continuing to
>> increase, if the developers are otherwise unoccupied?
>
> Those are very important questions
Glad you agree!
> and they should have been investigated, analyzed, and answered
I agree also! This sort of activity is natural in a project that
engages in self-reflection. If a project has leadership, then naturally
leadership would be conducting the exercise.
> _before_ showing us a bunch of naïve graphs and drawing conclusions
> from them (which unsurprisingly coincide with the opinions the author
> expressed long before showing those graphs).
I know that we may disagree on interpretation of the data, and that
neither you nor I can avoid starting this kind of investigation with
preconceptions, but please believe that I did the analysis in good
faith.
I started with an open question about what it would mean for GNU to be a
project in good or bad health, settled on using project release data as
a base, and in the end thought active projects could be a good measure.
There are other ways to interpret the data; again, if the data have
problems, corrections are welcome, or fork the repo and do your own
analysis... seriously. If we admit the possibility that GNU may be in
a bad state, then we should certainly look into it. I have my
conclusions which I stand by but which are certainly not set in stone.
> If someone wants to try answering this question:
>
>> If a set of developers finish a package, and don't start on a new one, I
>> think that says something interesting about the health of GNU and its
>> community.
I agree entirely, it's a very good question.
> Why wasn't such (or similar) analysis done before coming up with this
> "state of GNUnion"? I think such anecdotal studies can speak volumes
> more than those graphs.
This could be! Please do go out and ask.
> And then we have Guile, whose development pace leaves a lot to be
> desired, if we really want it to become the GNU standard extension
> languages. Strangely, the Guile developers, including Andy Wingo,
> don't seem to do anything about that. There are no discussions about
> making the project more active, none at all. Does that mean the Guile
> level of activity is OK with Andy? If so, how does that live in peace
> with the seemingly grave outlook for the rest of GNU?
Honestly this argument is beneath you. You do not believe my
conclusions about GNU -- which is fine -- but instead you try to shift
the focus to the project I maintain, claiming that it is in poor health
-- something that which would not invalidate the argument -- but, with
no data or analysis to back it up, which is the aspect that you
criticise about my conclusion. WTF.
We can never know what might have been, but I believe that without my
work on Guile, it would certainly be dead now. If you believe
otherwise, it's an interesting discussion, but not germane to the
current one.
> Last, but not least: I'm not at all sure that statistics of the kind
> we were presented, which is based on various measures of package
> activity, tells anything about "the health of GNU", because GNU, at
> least as I understand that term, has almost nothing to do with
> development activity of GNU packages. The development activity is
> determined solely by the project's development team and its abilities
> to draw contributions and find worthy development goals. GNU as an
> organization doesn't have any impact on that, because they almost
> never interfere into these matters (unless there's some sort of
> scandal, which happens only very rarely).
Thought experiment: what would GNU be if all of its packages stopped
developing? Dead, right?
I understand that some GNU developers feel that things are fine. I
heartily encourage you to come up with criteria by which to understand
the health of GNU and to make an associated investigation. I have done
so for myself and the results are not satisfying.
Regards,
Andy
- Feedback on the FSF and GNU, Andy Wingo, 2020/02/10
- Re: Feedback on the FSF and GNU, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2020/02/10
- State of the GNUnion 2020, Andy Wingo, 2020/02/10
- Re: State of the GNUnion 2020, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2020/02/11
- Re: State of the GNUnion 2020, DJ Delorie, 2020/02/11
- Re: State of the GNUnion 2020, Jean Louis, 2020/02/12
- Re: State of the GNUnion 2020, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2020/02/12
- Re: State of the GNUnion 2020, Eli Zaretskii, 2020/02/13
- Re: [Hangout - NYLXS] State of the GNUnion 2020, Alexandre François Garreau, 2020/02/15
- Re: State of the GNUnion 2020,
Andy Wingo <=
- Re: State of the GNUnion 2020, Eli Zaretskii, 2020/02/18
- Re: State of the GNUnion 2020, Andreas Enge, 2020/02/18
- Re: State of the GNUnion 2020, Eli Zaretskii, 2020/02/18
- Re: State of the GNUnion 2020, Ruben Safir, 2020/02/20
- Re: State of the GNUnion 2020, Alfred M. Szmidt, 2020/02/18
- Re: State of the GNUnion 2020, Ruben Safir, 2020/02/20
- Re: State of the GNUnion 2020, Kaz Kylheku (gnu-misc-discuss), 2020/02/19
- Re: State of the GNUnion 2020, DJ Delorie, 2020/02/19
- Re: State of the GNUnion 2020, Jean Louis, 2020/02/19
- Re: State of the GNUnion 2020, DJ Delorie, 2020/02/20