From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Bastien Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Org mode and Emacs Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2022 08:12:13 +0200 Organization: GNU Message-ID: <87wn9qfyv6.fsf@gnu.org> References: <87y1u8b1gj.fsf@gmail.com> <8735cgot9x.fsf@gnu.org> <83leq7naql.fsf@gnu.org> <86o7v3ryan.fsf@gmail.com> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="4528"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/29.0.50 (gnu/linux) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Tim Cross Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Mon Sep 26 08:15:34 2022 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 1ochOv-00015I-Sg for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 26 Sep 2022 08:15:34 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:59688 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ochOu-0007q2-PJ for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Mon, 26 Sep 2022 02:15:32 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:53494) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ochLk-0006Kt-Rz for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 26 Sep 2022 02:12:16 -0400 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::e]:34876) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ochLk-000480-Hu; Mon, 26 Sep 2022 02:12:16 -0400 DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; q=dns/txt; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gnu.org; s=fencepost-gnu-org; h=MIME-Version:Date:References:In-Reply-To:Subject:To: From; bh=RKVoEIFbAykt4M+5LnvaJWzKt/x/CmFh8MVjWDAOeVc=; b=EdWErZkau9uPR42xz+hs QG4mHS0hncUawNcRQ556w/JfonaRlaleLHw/sjt/VbVfIdbtmsLCMe9tUw8UkQ2ZqJDzuBxGLLmu5 3HWugzsDNf2phtvOLYguo7yW+cgwMPIxwUTKgkf2xQmNMl67/g0nFVmJp2ewV21A0keq0SF0Zv4mN iONrpEwNaXjARGhoFrREYXA2JUdQhZ0GOO9UdjQ3xTRvDTyaeaoPTAmvRCAbNa5uDXxPuvaBAEXFA oKH32H4iSj4WgAOxcHcnDU5JfxpiR1UtB0l3n8RxMG1LSYoZNKAwwcUrqL9QadcpNclzlsFA88EUB 9R5nxO+5OO7M3w==; Original-Received: from 96.52.140.77.rev.sfr.net ([77.140.52.96]:53400 helo=hal) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1ochLk-0006ji-6c; Mon, 26 Sep 2022 02:12:16 -0400 Original-Received: by hal (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 2720D1E0409; Mon, 26 Sep 2022 08:12:13 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: <86o7v3ryan.fsf@gmail.com> (Tim Cross's message of "Mon, 26 Sep 2022 05:47:51 +1000") 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" Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:296252 Archived-At: Hi Tim, Tim Cross writes: > The question I wonder about is where are we most likely to get the > majority of our contributions from, those who use org mode and know it > or those who don't and for those who use org-mode, how many will > know texinfo? Recruiting contributors for Org is also a way to recruit contributors for the GNU project in general, which uses Texinfo as its standard format for manuals. For occasional fixes, I don't think the difference between the .texi and .org format makes that much of a difference. For substantial contributions, it probably does: but contributors of these important changes are probably those for which this difference can easily be overcome -- and *should* be overcome, because they are also potential contributors for the GNU project. > (I still find determining if something is a > known issue or not and the state of progress to resolving it difficult > to track (FWIW I agree, that's the motivation behind my work on Woof!.) > Real problem is the challenge of realising a better > process given the very very few core contributors available - basically > a resourcing challenge). What we don't see so far is the contributors we lose because we use .org as the format for the manual: Eli is one and there are probably others. > At the end of the day, I think the dog food argument is > important. Having the manual in org format has seen a number of > improvements and does provide a good and most importantly large and used > example. Having a sample document which developers could use to verify > parsers etc would be a good addition, but the problem with such > documents is they tend not to be maintained and are not actively > used. There is huge value in having a large and reasonably complex > document which is being actively updated/enhanced and which is used in > the real world to produce documents in various formats which are also > actively read and used. It tends to be in active use of generated > documents we find more subtle issues, things which tend to be > missed in cursory scans of test documents. Full disclosure: the dog food argument never convinced me. Dog fooding /per se/ never makes any sense, unless you motivate it with another good reason. I suspect our (lispian?) brains is fascinated by recursive stuff (a rose is a rose is a rose) but this is something we should resist. Anyway, I won't insist on this anymore, the decision will be that of all Org core maintainers, of course. -- Bastien