Re: Proposal for an Emacs User Survey

[Jean Louis]

* Thibaut Verron <thibaut.verron@gmail.com> [2020-10-12 10:00]:
> > Tell me examples of popular usage that you refer to?
> 
> Downloading packages from Melpa every day. Or even using Doom or
> Spacemacs (both activate the Melpa repository afaict, through Straight
> in the case of Doom).

Aha.

As there is disagreement between GNU project and MELPA way of
providing software packages, and as it is obvious that many users do
use MELPA, there is no need to ask what is obvious, one has to
implement wider software package repository from GNU project itself.

Spacemacs is configuration, it is also considered software, so also
for this is obvious that 20,000+ Microsoft Github users have given
star/like on Github, as that is what I understand when I read 20.7k+
-- so it is obvious, that need not be asked, asking would be useless
compared to obvious statistical results. (Note, when I use the word
Microsoft in front of Github, it is used in the sense of warning.)

Unless Github statistics are fake, GNU Emacs developers can already
think why those 20,700+ users are using Spacemacs and think how to
improve Emacs in general. In my opinion there is no need to ask what
is obvious. There is need to act.

> > Free form gives enough possibility for any user to explain anything
> > they wish.
> 
> But do they wish to?

So far I read on this list, that was proposed by RMS and few others
acknowledged it, I also think that it should be free form and I and
Drew, we like it to be included permanently in the menu, something
like:

Help -> Tell us how to improve

Then from Tell us how to improve:

-> Report Emacs bug
-> Suggest improvements
-> Subscribe to Help GNU Emacs mailing list
-> Send email to Help GNU Emacs list
-> Unsubscribe from Help GNU Emacs mailing list

The menu item "Suggest improvements" could be similar to
report-emacs-bug just enlightening and inviting user to communicate
about enhancements.

There is no need in Emacs for those opinion poll surveys with set of
questions, it is questionable and unclear who would be doing such
survey, who would be paying for that, and who would be evaluating it.

What is successful action is to listen to users who write to
help-gnu-emacs, devel-emacs and developers also listen to users beyond
official GNU communication lines, so that what is successful is
working, and need not be changed.

Cheapest long term solution is to embed it in Emacs, that is anyway
inviting new users to collaborate. Then listening to users and
improving by understanding their needs.

> Imagine a poll for a presidential election, where John Doe and Richard
> Miles are the frontrunners.
> 
> Now let's say that a pollster frames its question like this:
> 
> "Who do you intend to vote for?
> - John Doe
> - Other (please specify)"
> 
> What would you think of the data resulting from such a poll?

I know what you mean, especially for the reason that I have been doing
surveys with people on the phone, in person face to face, on the
street, and by visiting people at their homes, I have got paid for
making surveys, and I know how to evaluate surveys, and how to write
them properly.

My answer to that proposal is same as Drew's, something like
implementation of the above menus in the Help.

> > GNU project with promotion of free software is not biased as that
> > would mean that it is influenced in an unfair way.
> 
> The GNU project is not biased. But the proposed amended survey would
> be, similar to the hypothetical presidential poll above.

So far I know, GNU project is not encompassing projects that are not
ethical.

For those questions that RMS proposed, I think they are also not
necessary to be made for the reason that every survey gives its
results or data that has to be evaluated, and it is obvious that many
users, millions probably, do not know what is Linux as kernel and what
is operating system.

In that sense, Emacs already has in its splash screen (About GNU Emacs):
Welcome to GNU Emacs, one component of the GNU/Linux operating system

Where the words "GNU/Linux" are hyperlinked to appropriate GNU page.

nd in my opinion, Emacs should contain more information and links to
free software, that should be *contained* in the Emacs distribution
and not just hyperlinked.

For example I think that GNU Manifesto should go back to GNU Emacs
where it was, it should be obtainable through Help system.

Additionally, I would include in the Help system, the option to turn
on "Free Software Menu".

Then the Free Software menu option would appear with various
submenues, delivering GNU free software philosophy straight from
Emacs, without using Internet.

My opinion is maybe in that sense more "pushy" then what RMS wants, I
think that free software philosophy has to be pushy 10 times more than
it is now, as the increase of proprietary software and troublesame
abuses of people on this planet increased as well.

> Okay, that is a valid point (although I would be interested to
> know if people still use Marmalade). But then we might as well drop
> the repository question altogether.

I would drop all the questions, and just have it embedded in Emacs
Help menu for people to complain, suggest improvements, etc. System
already exists, but "Report Emacs bug" does not incite suggesting
improvements.

I read now that Marmalade has been discontinued.

Proposal about making a survey is fine, why not? But where is the
person responsible, money, funds, methods, tactical plan how to
implement the survey, evaluator, and so on?!

All that is time and resources consuming process, while in same time
developers already know what is attracting people, what has to be done
to be improved, they are finally improving it every day.

> > AND more important reason not to ask is that information about
> > usage of those repositories, likes, number of contributors, it is
> > already available on the Microsoft Github "Insights" link on the
> > MELPA page. There is no point in asking users what is already
> > obvious. There are stars or likes on Github.
> 
> This data might have its own selection bias.

Of course. I would not trust the Microsoft Github data at all, and it
does not show logically to be true, here is short analysis:

- we assume here that Spacemacs has 20700 stars/likes on Microsoft
  Github, because it says so on the page. Does that mean those are
  "users" of Spacemacs? Hard to believe, see below why.

- if I open the main Spacemacs Github page, I can see that last
  improvement on Spacemacs was 29th February 2020, there is not much
  going on. But Spacemacs is appearing as first on Github for the
  search word "emacs".

- I can see number of contributors, number is 562 contributors, there
  are so many contributors but the last update was 29th February 2020,
  maybe I am mistaken. So many contributors are counted as such if
  they report a bug, they do not write software necessarily. I can see
  very unrelated or mixture of bugs reported:
  https://github.com/syl20bnr/spacemacs/issues?q=is%3Aissue+is%3Aclosed

- in my opinion, there is maybe 1000 - max 2000 real users of
  Spacemacs, not more than that. I am assumin that maybe each among 4
  will make "issue" and thus become contributor, about 562 x 4 people
  is my imaginative assumption of number of users who ever tried
  Spacemacs, and I am sure that bunch of them stopped using it as
  well. 

It is untrue that 20700 stars mean there are so many users, people
click how they want and wish. Spacemacs is definitely not for
beginners, it is distributed from Git, so user must have and know how
to git pull or clone it.

It could be as well possible that author have advertised Spacemacs
back in time. In general, it is doing good job to advertise Emacs.

Jean