Re: Concerns about community contributor support

[Thomas S. Dye]

Timothy <tecosaur@gmail.com> writes:

> > , but Org mode development is
> > in a new phase that *requires* technique and is quicker to 
> > identify and filter
> > out noise.
>
> Hmmm, what constitutes noise?
Good question.  I suppose like most words the meaning changes over 
time.  Early on, posts along the lines of "Wouldn't it be cool if 
Org mode would do this?" were given more space than they seem to 
be today.  Tim Cross points out a project trajectory that appears 
to be common and would explain why.  At a more concrete level, I 
can offer several of my posts to the list :)

> > These changes mean that contributions need to be checked for 
> > contributions to
> > Nicolas' project and also fit into the history of discussion 
> > and development.
> > The Org mode project now resembles a scholarly discipline that 
> > moves slowly and
> > deliberately toward a more or less well defined goal.  The days 
> > when Carsten
> > would bang out a new feature during his train ride home from 
> > work are gone.
>
> I think here there may have been a minor misunderstanding
> /miscommunication. Reading this paragraph I get the sense you 
> read my
> email as complaining about a delay in merging patches, however 
> this is a
> separate ---if related--- point to what I intended to raise: the
> lack of /response/ to patches.
>
> 1. Were I talking about merging: a more considered development 
> model, as
>    you describe above, can certainly see a protracted merge 
>    delay.
>    However, 6 months for a minor feature addition [1], and 2 
>    months for
>    a minor bug fix [2] is not justified by a more considered 
>    development
>    model IMO.
> 2. (My main point) Even if development is slower, leaving a 
> first-time
>    contributor with /absolutely no response/, i.e. *zero* 
>    replies to
>    their email *months* after they sent it (see [1] and [2] for 
>    example,
>    and updates.orgmode.org for more) is not good enough IMO. We 
>    should
>    be better.
So, something in between merging (or not) and appearing on the 
public list that Bastien keeps?

> Once again, with reference to my earlier paragraph, IMO slowed
> development is one thing, not responding at all to attempted
> contributors for months on end another. It is the latter which I 
> seek to
> improve. I can, have, and will try to help with this myself; but 
> I think
> we would benefit from a "community effort" and a discussion on 
> what the
> best way to improve this is.

What do you think of Tim Cross' suggestion that a way forward is 
for "new features and enhancements to be initially implemented as 
add on contribution packages rather than as extensions/enhancement 
to the core 'org-mode' package"? This sounds good to me, but I'm 
not much of a programmer and lack the ability to suss out its 
ramifications fully.  I can see how it would ease Org mode 
maintenance, though.

All the best,
Tom

--
Thomas S. Dye
https://tsdye.online/tsdye