Eli Zaretskii writes: >> From: "Dr. Arne Babenhauserheide" >> Cc: "Alfred M. Szmidt" , eliz@gnu.org, luangruo@yahoo.com, >> emacs-devel@gnu.org >> Date: Sun, 18 Jun 2023 10:59:42 +0200 >> >> > And then if that's not enough, from what I've seen maintainers also >> > expect you to have read CONTRIBUTE section, which is absolutely large, >> > much bigger than "Sending patches". (to be fair, if you are a new >> > contributor, you won't know it exists because "Sending patches" has no >> > mention of it). >> >> Same here. I see quite a bit of explanation in the CONTRIBUTE file that >> makes that longer than the information a contributor really has to know. > > People keep asking for more and more details to be described there, so > what you expect doesn't stand the test of time and user expectations. What would you do if CONTRIBUTING were a user interface? Would you include every idea someone has? > It is clear that you personally may not need everything there, but > CONTRIBUTE is not for you and me, or others like we. For whom *is* CONTRIBUTE? >> For a github project (to name the elefant in the room) you also have to >> know the URL, but there it feels easier. Can we make that easier in the >> existing infrastructure? > > Type "gnu emacs" into an Internet search window. The first result > will likely to be the Emacs site. Click on "Documentation & Support" > and read there. How hard is that? > > Are we perhaps making a mountain out of a proverbial molehill? I don’t think so. I consider this a writing problem. But do see my other email with a concrete description and proposal how to package the information needed for contributing in a way that makes it much easier to take in. Best wishes, Arne -- Unpolitisch sein heißt politisch sein, ohne es zu merken. draketo.de