From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Adam Porter Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: [ELPA] New package: dape Date: Sat, 4 Nov 2023 14:15:27 -0500 Message-ID: <578e5b13-d7f1-47da-9979-850a6aadb0ed@alphapapa.net> References: <83jzqx4kk6.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="24346"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Mozilla Thunderbird Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: eliz@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Nov 04 20:16:39 2023 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([209.51.188.17]) by ciao.gmane.io with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1qzM8M-0006AU-KL for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 04 Nov 2023 20:16:39 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qzM7M-0003Dg-3U; Sat, 04 Nov 2023 15:15:36 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qzM7L-0003DM-4r for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 04 Nov 2023 15:15:35 -0400 Original-Received: from bird.elm.relay.mailchannels.net ([23.83.212.17]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qzM7I-0007bC-0V; Sat, 04 Nov 2023 15:15:34 -0400 X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|adam@alphapapa.net Original-Received: from relay.mailchannels.net (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id E71BE9018FC; Sat, 4 Nov 2023 19:15:28 +0000 (UTC) Original-Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a302.dreamhost.com (unknown [127.0.0.6]) (Authenticated sender: dreamhost) by relay.mailchannels.net (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 960A590191C; Sat, 4 Nov 2023 19:15:28 +0000 (UTC) ARC-Seal: i=1; s=arc-2022; d=mailchannels.net; t=1699125328; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=Sm+9bm1Iwgu8WEcpbP5JlzPMwz6w/+Uy7Ls1Lnpmu52jLGNuUUGSgnU+fH180wKa4gm4YB w8XIiUtOJ5Fj5uDb/buW/L1gnPMtmAph1yT59w13n1aiCm7oeUV0q41NnuZuuID1JzB70w wj2uc6Ujjjr5B3k2Wrjwp6N5lnqxlL5P77USOqHcEXN7bIBxLLOtOHzIsE94OymZkDGYgG j1eIPLCkG5n/pjh8HJnAvlw3+tJkB0W4zdAkjO13DodZhILpqDGBq6CYdDGOzcmsmUQgnF GFtMjVJuY7mUf0+0X7YH4vr39QfCIaoTCeupma92KT85uqKiWzOEwGFftQ+P3g== ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mailchannels.net; s=arc-2022; t=1699125328; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:dkim-signature; bh=yekj769etK/1bptQNhiLhsFkE/ET8VLJxRzhs8YNcy8=; b=xozgX84m7Xvm74q9UQTuHTNQG6+MuX2vxnFWwlUEie1ZkwB3BjssPknxS5TAZX2IVSndMi zvROcAMNyG6bg+44Q6pG9VTCoOpbvnqF+/ij06gR3NS31ck0xjv93oMeIxs/sbZ+nNqgIN k0Z8VA7sEw0ksH7KhnFmsGKwr+RDJY59A87Grxd5Vqs2PrmPEnC2a1csDGa6SomMvp86Hw VwhwZzqIQ5sX6OZXHvyDYj6NbyzQ6fOo2fVUlERBwzqIKnAtHttbJbpOtyE1hVdmgVQPPK 2MKVvmZYlzErpK21CJ4jNfdHh9UdY+yUqBC728Cjh/TsITSCfG6yhM5ic5v4Ug== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; rspamd-76878f7dcc-x6mcj; auth=pass smtp.auth=dreamhost smtp.mailfrom=adam@alphapapa.net X-Sender-Id: dreamhost|x-authsender|adam@alphapapa.net X-MC-Relay: Neutral X-MailChannels-SenderId: dreamhost|x-authsender|adam@alphapapa.net X-MailChannels-Auth-Id: dreamhost X-Cooperative-Quick: 4c7022c73730cdcd_1699125328736_697399107 X-MC-Loop-Signature: 1699125328736:2601411795 X-MC-Ingress-Time: 1699125328736 Original-Received: from pdx1-sub0-mail-a302.dreamhost.com (pop.dreamhost.com [64.90.62.162]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384) by 100.127.137.22 (trex/6.9.2); Sat, 04 Nov 2023 19:15:28 +0000 Original-Received: from [10.43.2.102] (unknown [193.56.116.15]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_128_GCM_SHA256 (128/128 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) (Authenticated sender: adam@alphapapa.net) by pdx1-sub0-mail-a302.dreamhost.com (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4SN6l40nbbzQ7; Sat, 4 Nov 2023 12:15:27 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=alphapapa.net; s=dreamhost; t=1699125328; bh=yekj769etK/1bptQNhiLhsFkE/ET8VLJxRzhs8YNcy8=; h=Date:To:Cc:Subject:From:Content-Type:Content-Transfer-Encoding; b=GyoKDfhT3xRkS0cc6qeaKcZh+/F61nLuRLLUyBsjpd3cZ+lhxVQ7LzhF79OFmIxQv lS/5gspwYg07CSVlghs9fkngAbk10U2ozBiqW+hJX0eUnuRZBTHKueCgptnAGb+x40 HAtK/oUxk5XvGHhdOvWaLlBXXPQ7J8sxcgaVIJCpTRYEiH1ZK5nVCI6f345SYS84kH JhhRQnNrWB8bQinLlTuS7uE7iRZxOcMkhvq4XjL54xh1Wbv+Hkwg6vfZL95dgh/Dho 20suuR1fqNXs8zDPhFGnhBZLpbZmSdVa5m4nuWFhlqSC1P04peAI9/xBoOsNAdyySE uaDm07ZfrdldA== Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: <83jzqx4kk6.fsf@gnu.org> Received-SPF: neutral client-ip=23.83.212.17; envelope-from=adam@alphapapa.net; helo=bird.elm.relay.mailchannels.net X-Spam_score_int: -12 X-Spam_score: -1.3 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.3 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_EF=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H4=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_NEUTRAL=0.779, T_SCC_BODY_TEXT_LINE=-0.01 autolearn=no autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:312223 Archived-At: Hi Eli, >> I don't mean to insinuate. I mean to share observations and >> experiences. You and others may not intend to pressure authors, but >> when a thread bikeshedding a name goes on for 10 or 20 messages with >> numerous authors piling on their own hues, it can feel, to the author, >> like he is being pressured to change his mind, or that his contribution >> is being, well, taken away, to an extent. > > I very much doubt that authors feel this way, but even if they do, > that feeling is unjustified, even if the 10 or 20 figures are correct > > It should be abundantly clear that the authors have the last word on > this. How else can it be? It is the author who contributes the > package, so we have no means of forcing him or her to do anything they > don't want. Even suggesting that is an insult of sorts. > > I'm sorry, but these experiences are wrong, and I dare to say that > posts like yours are at least one factor for these incorrect > conclusions. > > Once again: there's no pressure, and there can be no pressure. It's > an illusion. I understand and appreciate that no pressure is intended toward me or any other authors who submit their packages to ELPA, with regard to the name that is chosen for a package. However, what I'm trying to say is that that intention is not always clearly communicated to the authors. As well, observers also take note of these discussions, and from talking with some of them, it's not uncommonly interpreted as pressure--and that is, I think, to the detriment of ELPA's reputation (only my opinion, of course). I've been using Emacs and participating in the wider community for a number of years now. I have a decent understanding of the varying cultures and norms of emacs-devel, Reddit's Emacs-related subreddits, the "blogosphere," IRC/Matrix chat, etc. I interact regularly with users who are new to Emacs, and users who are new to writing and contributing Elisp code and packages. I've advised many of them, written my own Elisp packaging guide, etc. And something I've observed is that people are often intimidated by emacs-devel, the ELPA submission process, etc. That is not to say that they *should be* intimidated, but they are. It often takes some encouraging to "get over the hump" and actually submit a package to ELPA. So imagine being one of those authors, likely new to Elisp development, often not considering oneself to "really" be a "programmer" (even though they are), and presenting one's work in this "hallowed" place for evaluation by the legendary hackers and maintainers of Emacs (not that these hackers and maintainers view themselves that way). When they reply asking that the package be renamed--and sometimes more than just asking or suggesting; sometimes the name is criticized as being unhelpful, and then it's even said that such names are harmful to Emacs and to users--well, I think it's easy for a contributor to interpret such replies as more than just asking or suggesting. > There can always be a better name, all these considerations > notwithstanding. So we will continue asking authors to consider > changing the names when the original name is far from being > self-explanatory. Once again, it is our _duty_, exactly as it's our > duty to make sure the code's copyright is assigned to the FSF and that > the code follows our coding conventions. (The latter issues, btw, are > much more significant contributors to "harming ELPA reputation".) I wouldn't expect otherwise. I would suggest only that you (or whoever asks) consider making the suggestion more gently (less as a criticism), and that it be made clear that the request is just a request, not a requirement to be met in order to proceed. It seems common for an impression to be left that the package may be added after a consensus is reached on a name, which, as you said, isn't intended. > Here's the text I posted in this particular case: > > I wonder if you could come up with a name that tells something about > the package's purpose. "plz-see" tells me "please see", and I don't > see any relation to HTTP, REST, pretty-printing, or popup buffers. > > Please tell me how is this anything but "a mere suggestion". I should have been more clear: I did not write to criticize you, personally, but to discuss the general pattern I've observed from the replies on this list when packages are submitted (e.g. there being two such threads going on now). > P.S. I took the liberty of removing addressees from the CC list and > leaving on the mailing list, as I don't see the need to bother people > personally, especially since all or almost all of them read this list > anyway. No objection here. I was "replying to all" as I've seen you say several times that to do so is SOP here. As well, I don't subscribe to the list myself, reading by other means. Thanks, Adam