From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Philip Kaludercic Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Representation of the Emacs userbase on emacs-devel Date: Thu, 02 Sep 2021 20:35:07 +0000 Message-ID: <87r1e690n8.fsf_-_@posteo.net> References: <87h7fcnmq0.fsf@posteo.net> <83tujbqg4j.fsf@gnu.org> <46353190-1190-495f-b15e-22980159b3ab@yandex.ru> <83y28mp0rb.fsf@gnu.org> <51a363db-fde7-791d-cf8d-98ac601d62ee@yandex.ru> <57ca4d78-2339-201d-edce-678c9b003a99@yandex.ru> <83bl5dsh8b.fsf@gnu.org> <8335qps8vs.fsf@gnu.org> <9471c28f-8eae-b555-ee86-9fffd6229937@yandex.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="40564"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: danflscr@gmail.com, rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org, monnier@iro.umontreal.ca, eliz@gnu.org, John Yates To: Dmitry Gutov Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Thu Sep 02 22:36:13 2021 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 1mLtRV-000AML-N8 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 02 Sep 2021 22:36:13 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:49326 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mLtRU-0007Zf-Gy for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Thu, 02 Sep 2021 16:36:12 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:43888) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mLtQY-0005Y6-Tx for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Sep 2021 16:35:15 -0400 Original-Received: from mout02.posteo.de ([185.67.36.66]:34713) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1mLtQW-0004R6-TS for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Thu, 02 Sep 2021 16:35:14 -0400 Original-Received: from submission (posteo.de [89.146.220.130]) by mout02.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 9DD2E240104 for ; Thu, 2 Sep 2021 22:35:09 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1630614909; bh=bY1RLa6UhI9m5uHIp//N0E8/A1lFNMQiqYydc1zHDjo=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Autocrypt:Date:From; b=i0WkrZKTGB5P37N77fBTmkGYILoSNMyx/S7CG5RUWt5Ors4+P/jnAiv3qKt9/0tBb uwCgUXLtcRalzp25P8Ls1I+bM7tPB1QeiVF05QP18oIRzH+U3kiPmPHUXlkJX6fEaw wdoQ3ug9u71mTeKYBYPrQaNgWoNiSiqUZw2VrcuLyXSYIax47LGMaGnUPCbWz4xvOv Q1/5U7k5l5Mi11UdHJZJ7ukG+o8OoLNnTEtDL0wx22LRd3x6NrmgH7cdnLHRlRi4EU 18kPJ9frNzF4l6Vl8v/mnC9FsFNrDRiyblajLVxRveBkUDrlajFitjN0olCxp+tfJ9 WftbLVCcl34kA== Original-Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4H0t300fyBz6tmG; Thu, 2 Sep 2021 22:35:07 +0200 (CEST) Autocrypt: addr=philipk@posteo.net; prefer-encrypt=mutual; keydata= mDMEYHHqUhYJKwYBBAHaRw8BAQdAp3GdmYJ6tm5McweY6dEvIYIiry+Oz9rU4MH6NHWK0Ee0QlBo aWxpcCBLYWx1ZGVyY2ljIChnZW5lcmF0ZWQgYnkgYXV0b2NyeXB0LmVsKSA8cGhpbGlwa0Bwb3N0 ZW8ubmV0PoiQBBMWCAA4FiEEDM2H44ZoPt9Ms0eHtVrAHPRh1FwFAmBx6lICGwMFCwkIBwIGFQoJ CAsCBBYCAwECHgECF4AACgkQtVrAHPRh1FyTkgEAjlbGPxFchvMbxzAES3r8QLuZgCxeAXunM9gh io0ePtUBALVhh9G6wIoZhl0gUCbQpoN/UJHI08Gm1qDob5zDxnIHuDgEYHHqUhIKKwYBBAGXVQEF AQEHQNcRB+MUimTMqoxxMMUERpOR+Q4b1KgncDZkhrO2ql1tAwEIB4h4BBgWCAAgFiEEDM2H44Zo Pt9Ms0eHtVrAHPRh1FwFAmBx6lICGwwACgkQtVrAHPRh1Fw1JwD/Qo7kvtib8jy7puyWrSv0MeTS g8qIxgoRWJE/KKdkCLEA/jb9b9/g8nnX+UcwHf/4VfKsjExlnND3FrBviXUW6NcB In-Reply-To: <9471c28f-8eae-b555-ee86-9fffd6229937@yandex.ru> (Dmitry Gutov's message of "Thu, 2 Sep 2021 22:02:25 +0300") Received-SPF: pass client-ip=185.67.36.66; envelope-from=philipk@posteo.net; helo=mout02.posteo.de X-Spam_score_int: -43 X-Spam_score: -4.4 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.4 / 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_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no 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:273730 Archived-At: Dmitry Gutov writes: > Under the current system a sufficiently loud single user can > effectively veto any change. Or at least 3-4 such users. > > But even 5 or 10 users are in no way representative of our entire user base. But don't they represent other users? The fundamental issue underlying all of this is that different people have different ideas of who is using Emacs. We cannot say if emacs-devel is representative of the entire user base or not. One can certainly sense differences when comparing it to different communities (HN, /r/emacs, /emg/, popular bloggers, various developer groups, ...), but these all tend to skew towards Emacs enthusiasts, so they cannot be seen as reliable metric either. I agree that the ability for a handful of users to veto changes can be annoying, but how harmful it is should be decided on a case-to-case basis. Do you (or anyone else) have any examples of where one or just a few people prevented a change from being made that you think would have been good in your eyes? -- Philip Kaludercic