From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: New maintainer Date: Sat, 03 Oct 2015 22:48:07 +0300 Message-ID: <83bncf3f9k.fsf@gnu.org> References: <5610207A.2000300@harpegolden.net> <83fv1r3gzp.fsf@gnu.org> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1443901719 23034 80.91.229.3 (3 Oct 2015 19:48:39 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sat, 3 Oct 2015 19:48:39 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: John Wiegley Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sat Oct 03 21:48:31 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1ZiSnC-0006DO-By for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 03 Oct 2015 21:48:26 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:39824 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZiSnB-0007YQ-Lq for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sat, 03 Oct 2015 15:48:25 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:39971) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZiSn3-0007Op-TQ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Oct 2015 15:48:18 -0400 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZiSmz-0005cI-Sr for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Oct 2015 15:48:17 -0400 Original-Received: from mtaout28.012.net.il ([80.179.55.184]:54150) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1ZiSmz-0005c6-GS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Oct 2015 15:48:13 -0400 Original-Received: from conversion-daemon.mtaout28.012.net.il by mtaout28.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) id <0NVN00G00TMHCR00@mtaout28.012.net.il> for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 03 Oct 2015 22:47:46 +0300 (IDT) Original-Received: from HOME-C4E4A596F7 ([84.94.185.246]) by mtaout28.012.net.il (HyperSendmail v2007.08) with ESMTPA id <0NVN00EV2TNMPF10@mtaout28.012.net.il>; Sat, 03 Oct 2015 22:47:46 +0300 (IDT) In-reply-to: X-012-Sender: halo1@inter.net.il X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 80.179.55.184 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:190818 Archived-At: > From: John Wiegley > Date: Sat, 03 Oct 2015 12:19:57 -0700 >=20 > >>>>> Eli Zaretskii writes: >=20 > > How would such an arrangement differ from having just that head a= s a single > > maintainer? What can the co-maintainer do that the rest of us can= not? >=20 > The co-maintainer is usually given full maintainership over pieces = of the > puzzle he (or she) has expertise with, until such time that the hea= d > maintainer feels a unified direction is no longer being pursued. That's the situation with every non-maintainer here: they are free to do whatever they feel like in the areas they are interested in, with the head maintainer keeping an eye on their commits and asking them t= o make changes where he/she doesn't like the results. I don't see how what you describe is any different. > If there is commonality of thought between them, they typically act > in concert and most people wouldn't realize that one of them has > final decision. Of course, they will realize: if nothing else, that fact is announced up front. And even if someone misses that announcement, it becomes crystal clear very soon. Anyway, if there are never any differences of opinions (and I think it's na=EFve to expect that), then you have in effect a single person= , not 2 or 3. In which case there's no real meaning to being the head, is there? > Ensuring that one person sets the tone and vision for progress ensu= res that > things are never paralyzed by in-fighting or disagreement. If the > co-maintainer has issues with the maintainer, he resigns; if the ma= intainer > has issues with the co-maintainer, he asks him to step down. I don't think this could ever work well in a project such as Emacs. How can the head set the tone and vision, when he/she is not expert enough in at least a few of the core areas? If you want to set the tone and vision in the development of the area of my expertise -- let's take the support for bidirectional editing as a good example -- don't you need me to first teach you enough about that, so you could make up your own mind, instead of just trusting me? And if you are afraid of "issues" between us (i.e. you don't really trust me 100%), why would you believe that I'll make an unbiased presentation of what you need to learn, rather than bias it a bit to ensure that you agree with me? I think this method will encourage in-fighting and "bad blood", not play them down.