From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: Eric Abrahamsen Subject: Re: New maintainer Date: Sun, 21 Apr 2013 22:08:14 +0800 Message-ID: <8738ukou29.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> References: <87a9ovye43.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> <87ppxoqhx1.fsf@ericabrahamsen.net> <8738ukow64.fsf@bzg.ath.cx> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Return-path: Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([208.118.235.92]:40639) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UTuqK-00074x-Fv for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 21 Apr 2013 10:02:13 -0400 Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UTuqJ-0003x0-GR for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 21 Apr 2013 10:02:12 -0400 Received: from plane.gmane.org ([80.91.229.3]:34703) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1UTuqJ-0003wu-9k for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 21 Apr 2013 10:02:11 -0400 Received: from list by plane.gmane.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1UTuqF-0004AT-Jt for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Sun, 21 Apr 2013 16:02:07 +0200 Received: from 114.252.251.82 ([114.252.251.82]) by main.gmane.org with esmtp (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 21 Apr 2013 16:02:07 +0200 Received: from eric by 114.252.251.82 with local (Gmexim 0.1 (Debian)) id 1AlnuQ-0007hv-00 for ; Sun, 21 Apr 2013 16:02:07 +0200 List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sender: emacs-orgmode-bounces+geo-emacs-orgmode=m.gmane.org@gnu.org To: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org Bastien writes: > Eric Abrahamsen writes: > >> It's also been a pleasure to witness the surprisingly successful >> marriage of two different coding styles: Bastien's damn-the-torpedoes >> patch-the-SOB-and-get-it-out-the-door approach, matched with Nicolas' >> return to first principles: structure and cleanliness. I'm quite >> convinced that the two approaches have been equally essential to Org >> mode's current success (and advance apologies for any perceived >> mischaracterizations!). > > Yeah. > > Let me quote Jamie Zawinski's interview from "Coders at work": > > Zawinski: [...] It's great to rewrite your code and make it cleaner > and by the third time it'll actually be pretty. But that's not the > point---you're not here to write code, you're here to ship products. > > Seibel: Folks engaged in overengineering usually say, "Well, once > I've got this framework in place everything will be easy after that. > So I'll actually save time by doing this. > > Zawinski: That is always the theory. > > Seibel: And there are times when that theory is true, when someone > has good sense and the framework isn't too elaborate, and it does > save time. > > I actually agree with both points of view, especially with the last > sentence. And it's easy to play jwz when you can trust someone for > playing the other role :) And, without re-opening any tedious discussions that we've already put behind us, it's generally the person playing the jwz role who ends up as "maintainer" -- and that's probably as it should be.