From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Konstantin Kharlamov Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Why are so many great packages not trying to get included in GNU Emacs? WAS: Re: Making Emacs more friendly to newcomers Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2020 16:41:16 +0300 Message-ID: <790185da5c531a6c1442fa870feeea3444e0bf16.camel@yandex.ru> References: <863691n4xl.wl-me@enzu.ru> <87imhw431x.fsf@yahoo.com> <87mu78huhx.fsf_-_@yahoo.com> <87k12bdgx7.fsf@yahoo.com> <87r1wi7a8o.fsf@yahoo.com> <875zdteybt.fsf@runbox.com> <87368wrvf5.fsf@yahoo.com> <86k126d83n.wl-me@enzu.ru> <83pnbyckvv.fsf@gnu.org> <4923d7e98f5ed816a7569093dbc673153adcea88.camel@yandex.ru> <837dwb3zb6.fsf@gnu.org> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="128380"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Evolution 3.36.3 Cc: stefan@marxist.se, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sat Jun 13 15:42:42 2020 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 1jk6Qk-000XKU-3l for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 13 Jun 2020 15:42:42 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:59150 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jk6Qj-0000cR-4P for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 13 Jun 2020 09:42:41 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:36804) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jk6Pl-0008BL-Rk for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 13 Jun 2020 09:41:47 -0400 Original-Received: from forward104o.mail.yandex.net ([37.140.190.179]:35369) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jk6Pi-0001x8-1X; Sat, 13 Jun 2020 09:41:41 -0400 Original-Received: from mxback30g.mail.yandex.net (mxback30g.mail.yandex.net [IPv6:2a02:6b8:0:1472:2741:0:8b7:330]) by forward104o.mail.yandex.net (Yandex) with ESMTP id 0DE15941A45; Sat, 13 Jun 2020 16:41:19 +0300 (MSK) Original-Received: from iva7-f62245f79210.qloud-c.yandex.net (iva7-f62245f79210.qloud-c.yandex.net [2a02:6b8:c0c:2e83:0:640:f622:45f7]) by mxback30g.mail.yandex.net (mxback/Yandex) with ESMTP id WNZW6yPqU3-fIaWMNBQ; Sat, 13 Jun 2020 16:41:18 +0300 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yandex.ru; s=mail; t=1592055679; bh=t/b46o1tBK/CYDvX3k2fxKMVgDpQF8AALUQlr0dZacM=; h=In-Reply-To:Cc:To:From:Subject:References:Date:Message-ID; b=vdUzBCzTATCeBkLGpWlF26lxEREAi1HWOeHXQcYm+URjdUicrOxISfLM9upeAuDUa 6Je+oSidG1PHqppAi8wVnUKHh7/SQ+kAA26XfgDIlNK9gF8CTH4YKWGDv3JR/zKSqa mk6QdMqAS37/adKumiK5iGiFlVz2KP9d0Ayhnbmw= Authentication-Results: mxback30g.mail.yandex.net; dkim=pass header.i=@yandex.ru Original-Received: by iva7-f62245f79210.qloud-c.yandex.net (smtp/Yandex) with ESMTPSA id KgXp6bTtgP-fHXGxFLs; Sat, 13 Jun 2020 16:41:17 +0300 (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (Client certificate not present) In-Reply-To: <837dwb3zb6.fsf@gnu.org> Received-SPF: pass client-ip=37.140.190.179; envelope-from=hi-angel@yandex.ru; helo=forward104o.mail.yandex.net X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: First seen = 2020/06/13 09:41:19 X-ACL-Warn: Detected OS = Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] [fuzzy] X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=-0.01, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=-0.01, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001 autolearn=_AUTOLEARN X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.23 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" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:252165 Archived-At: On Sat, 2020-06-13 at 15:50 +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote: > > From: Konstantin Kharlamov > > Date: Sat, 13 Jun 2020 14:59:21 +0300 > > > > Okay, so usually email-based projects recommend using git-send- > > email. Recently I sent a patch like this¹ and got a complaint it > > doesn't look like what git-format-patch would produce (is that > > maybe a > > hint maintainers are being strained too?). Huh, wrong way again? > > FTR: that wasn't a complaint, it was a gentle request for the future. > Your patch was committed, before I sent that request, even though > committing it required some extra manual work on my part. > > We recommend using git-format-patch because it makes applying the > patch easier and less error prone. It never occurred to me that a > routine recommendation would be interpreted as a "complaint", let > alone trigger a 950-word rant. That "rant" is for a reason though? I love Emacs, and it hurts me to see human resources are being spent in places that other projects trivially avoid. If you multiply that effort by number of contributors that made similar mistake and maintainers that wrote to them about it, I think it would've resulted in time that could've been spent to do something much more useful.