From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp0 ([2001:41d0:2:bcc0::]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms0.migadu.com with LMTPS id VG5cJx0hgGAdTQEAgWs5BA (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 21 Apr 2021 14:57:01 +0200 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:2:bcc0::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp0 with LMTPS id aAn5IR0hgGAZaQAA1q6Kng (envelope-from ) for ; Wed, 21 Apr 2021 12:57:01 +0000 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 1351C15957 for ; Wed, 21 Apr 2021 14:57:01 +0200 (CEST) Received: from localhost ([::1]:43634 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lZCPc-0002uG-1C for larch@yhetil.org; Wed, 21 Apr 2021 08:57:00 -0400 Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:56136) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lZCOu-0002u0-7J for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Apr 2021 08:56:16 -0400 Received: from mail-ed1-f43.google.com ([209.85.208.43]:39589) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1lZCOq-00015m-6F for emacs-orgmode@gnu.org; Wed, 21 Apr 2021 08:56:15 -0400 Received: by mail-ed1-f43.google.com with SMTP id g17so48553904edm.6 for ; Wed, 21 Apr 2021 05:56:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:mime-version:references:in-reply-to:from:date :message-id:subject:to; bh=kNILuDzFu2Vt6VCt3eLzdKi188d9p8+UeG4Rx75K5aw=; b=gXX2UE6Eee64JIYMtiPIVPt5sZ27cv3kPGCHboKdyJt3UZ3M0KQzGGT3kAD65/Nreh e+2WPLbA0q5fPYOiMhi6l0UZnsp4FzMgqcCDalkZownJ9Xu5KUGSSfm7mTGHezS6c9hY k6w8AnPC7GXoHNFc4ZeoPc7fJUYvWBoJ1HX3ab6JFJ5tXqHZ+V444jBokdi/Q9jz7HB2 ioGS7DlQJRXKLhHCgEA9RQxP/jdw+5yT2Zx2pHTjNYoHV6NvtEX8Zxq/QEc6z8+4iDus Q3KXqnbK2Wb2DT7KwomAdkmg+nhSc6tJAVRjdg3YIDZc6RI5fRD8FmlXyFcKf2ocyM8T rBYA== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532b/KBpZIUKFir1Gvi9DBA/Xn4+GI3YQQqBMc46s/VTMDW2YUl0 n4re5ok5GgllyxBaj+hwBRLbIf68bQxIioW7ZH4+w4VoxDs= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxNeDAtn166KiYbtz5FldW6gpoakJWixlBOKh6i2ytwEhC1xOr+OLQ6vpFG6FYVAvXbTKEWcKBazwmKqj4ol+M= X-Received: by 2002:aa7:cc98:: with SMTP id p24mr38457428edt.187.1619009769589; Wed, 21 Apr 2021 05:56:09 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 References: <87pmyuyssi.fsf@gmail.com> <87eef4hs9o.fsf@gmail.com> <467d556f-f0fa-018f-99c6-54fb748ab451@gmx.at> In-Reply-To: <467d556f-f0fa-018f-99c6-54fb748ab451@gmx.at> From: ian martins Date: Wed, 21 Apr 2021 08:55:57 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Concerns about community contributor support To: Org-Mode mailing list Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="00000000000034522905c07b1696" Received-SPF: pass client-ip=209.85.208.43; envelope-from=ianxm1@gmail.com; helo=mail-ed1-f43.google.com X-Spam_score_int: -10 X-Spam_score: -1.1 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT=0.25, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.25, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-orgmode@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 Precedence: list List-Id: "General discussions about Org-mode." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-orgmode-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: "Emacs-orgmode" X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1619009821; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post; bh=kNILuDzFu2Vt6VCt3eLzdKi188d9p8+UeG4Rx75K5aw=; b=A74h97EzYLT34g6zoyfE3DUHzBiJRTfFpbvdPSM3TyAAsjLdzpwLD1xg2ksjlW3wcpP3sD yRaQD20aeChhyVbH8UzCZRTxJrtIVxdPW3+a5qmn+dyanZrM5bs1AokQs1z8XgcOaEdj3r lhUEaGhNdT0UYir8tPkL/R/Xssjj4kFAd8jHDikZC6UpBnXMMmtk1iOawlYImVHkjSvODB 8fhsqV/RFbsP1zA/ckz6VY7FN+DgE5Jr3FGZYupEeN8gLvdv+aMPmjSJzYHIGoR63pjb4t cESUDa7Sc0Aeui1TjQJfvZB91Jj6J48nZeYqtg1XLgKuQ+xxew+h7wrC6iga3A== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1619009821; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=Iv7bbGa5x7zD7/8kHEgY4fBY02jwNIVXJFZnG0mxD8cE27E+WRbQsZdFD2ypHxgeBeTnJ9 wKajv7x4yB8JT3Rg6oqQgkPX8wc/xB72io784LFhWnSfXnOxFuKlY4YjmHTceTph/AVXiV RMGIKfsC5ae/fBOZHRyXluYplNjPgX39fCExF0Jtm3/DPECjNdMhFMsEC+KJc71uYM6ckS T4ZbVW+NsaSefHGP1IQ0apwiZnMfN+fXlN/dR5++pC3437iFI14CNWeYBPKsO2AsRS/Jxy c635pJcPVaw9i/BylL8cq48Dri8q2QPnfffxfqiS3ep0KUJ5LvWaQPMFFOeouA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of emacs-orgmode-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=emacs-orgmode-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -2.34 Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (relaxed), No valid DKIM" header.from=jhu.edu (policy=none); spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of emacs-orgmode-bounces@gnu.org designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom=emacs-orgmode-bounces@gnu.org X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 1351C15957 X-Spam-Score: -2.34 X-Migadu-Scanner: scn0.migadu.com X-TUID: op9mbR4/rdj8 --00000000000034522905c07b1696 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Timothy, thanks for raising this. I agree with everything you've said in this thread. I think it may be a hard problem to solve, but maybe we can start by just trying to improve. To be clear the problem I'm talking about is that potential contributors sometimes receive no response from the list. Maybe it could help to normalize somewhat generic responses. Here are some possible situations where we might not respond to a patch submission, followed by a potential response we might consider: 1. A patch looks useful to me, but I feel I don't know if it's a good idea for org in general, or maybe I think it is but I cannot apply the patch because (I'm not a maintainer, I don't have elisp experience, I haven't signed the copyright release, etc) "Thanks for submitting this. I'd use it. Hopefully a maintainer will take a look." 2. A patch does not look useful to me, but I can see how it may be useful to someone else and it was posted a while ago and no one has commented yet. "Thanks for submitting this. It looks like this affects an org feature that not many of us use. Sorry, but it might not get much attention." 3. A patch does not look useful to me, and can't imagine how it is useful in any context. "What is your use case?" These trite responses may be seen as mailing list noise, but I don't think so. They assure the patch submitter that their patch has been seen and at least for (1) they signal to maintainers that the patch would be useful to somebody. There are volunteer maintainers for the codebase, and volunteers who help with the mailing list. Maybe someone who wants to help with this could check Bark once in a while and respond to submissions that have been missed or post them to the list to put them in front of everyone again. --00000000000034522905c07b1696 Content-Type: text/html; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Timothy, thanks for raising this. I agree with everyt= hing you've said
in this thread. I think it may be a hard problem to= solve, but maybe
we can start by just trying to improve. To be clear th= e problem I'm
talking about is that potential contributors sometimes= receive no
response from the list.


Maybe it could help to no= rmalize somewhat generic responses.=C2=A0 Here are
some possible situati= ons where we might not respond to a patch
submission, followed by a pote= ntial response we might consider:

1. A patch looks useful to me, but= I feel I don't know if it's a good
=C2=A0 =C2=A0idea for org in= general, or maybe I think it is but I cannot apply the
=C2=A0 =C2=A0pat= ch because (I'm not a maintainer, I don't have elisp experience, I<= br>=C2=A0 =C2=A0haven't signed the copyright release, etc)

=C2= =A0 =C2=A0"Thanks for submitting this. I'd use it.=C2=A0 Hopefully= a maintainer
=C2=A0 =C2=A0will take a look."

2. A patch doe= s not look useful to me, but I can see how it may be useful
=C2=A0 =C2= =A0to someone else and it was posted a while ago and no one has commented=C2=A0 =C2=A0yet.

=C2=A0 =C2=A0"Thanks for submitting this. I= t looks like this affects an org
=C2=A0 =C2=A0feature that not many of u= s use.=C2=A0 Sorry, but it might not get much
=C2=A0 =C2=A0attention.&qu= ot;

3. A patch does not look useful to me, and can't imagine how= it is useful
=C2=A0 =C2=A0in any context.

=C2=A0 =C2=A0"Wha= t is your use case?"


These trite resp= onses may be seen as mailing list noise, but I don't
think so. They = assure the patch submitter that their patch has been
seen and at least f= or (1) they signal to maintainers that the patch
would be useful to some= body.

There are volunteer maintainers for the codebase, and voluntee= rs who
help with the mailing list.=C2=A0 Maybe someone who wants to help= with this
could check Bark once in a while and respond to submissions t= hat have
been missed or post them to the list to put them in front of ev= eryone
again.
--00000000000034522905c07b1696--