From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Alan Mackenzie Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: What a modern collaboration toolkit looks like Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2007 13:44:02 +0000 Message-ID: <20071231134402.GB2737@muc.de> References: <20071230122217.3CA84830B9A@snark.thyrsus.com> <20071231131129.GA2737@muc.de> <87lk7b0zg6.fsf@catnip.gol.com> NNTP-Posting-Host: lo.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1199108134 8594 80.91.229.12 (31 Dec 2007 13:35:34 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 31 Dec 2007 13:35:34 +0000 (UTC) Cc: "Eric S. Raymond" , emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Miles Bader Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Dec 31 14:35:47 2007 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([199.232.76.165]) by lo.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.50) id 1J9Kny-0000hc-Ly for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 31 Dec 2007 14:35:46 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([127.0.0.1] helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J9Knd-0008Ns-0R for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 31 Dec 2007 08:35:25 -0500 Original-Received: from mailman by lists.gnu.org with tmda-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1J9KnZ-0008NN-0T for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 31 Dec 2007 08:35:21 -0500 Original-Received: from exim by lists.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.43) id 1J9KnX-0008MR-Dx for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 31 Dec 2007 08:35:20 -0500 Original-Received: from [199.232.76.173] (helo=monty-python.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.43) id 1J9KnX-0008MN-Bw for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 31 Dec 2007 08:35:19 -0500 Original-Received: from colin.muc.de ([193.149.48.1] helo=mail.muc.de) by monty-python.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS-1.0:DHE_RSA_AES_256_CBC_SHA1:32) (Exim 4.60) (envelope-from ) id 1J9KnW-0003tf-Rk for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 31 Dec 2007 08:35:19 -0500 Original-Received: (qmail 93548 invoked by uid 3782); 31 Dec 2007 13:35:17 -0000 Original-Received: from acm.muc.de (p57AF476D.dip.t-dialin.net [87.175.71.109]) by colin2.muc.de (tmda-ofmipd) with ESMTP; Mon, 31 Dec 2007 14:35:13 +0100 Original-Received: (qmail 4250 invoked by uid 1000); 31 Dec 2007 13:44:02 -0000 Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <87lk7b0zg6.fsf@catnip.gol.com> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.9i X-Delivery-Agent: TMDA/1.1.5 (Fettercairn) X-Primary-Address: acm@muc.de X-detected-kernel: by monty-python.gnu.org: FreeBSD 4.6-4.9 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.5 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:85734 Archived-At: Hi, Miles! On Mon, Dec 31, 2007 at 10:24:25PM +0900, Miles Bader wrote: > Alan Mackenzie writes: > >> Yet a third is that when we decide to do it, we can converge on a > >> releasable state with almost absurd ease. Like, Ivanovic (our > >> release manager) will announce "Point release scheduled this coming > >> Wednesday" and everyone will pretty much flip into bug-stomping > >> mode. The tracker bug list tends to shrink dramatically when this > >> happens -- not only do we get prepared for release but *we know > >> we've done so*. > > Eric, how well do you think this could work at all for Emacs? > I suspect that 90% of the difference in "responsiveness" between the > two projects has to do with the people (and numbers of people) > involved, not with the tools being used. What about the code base? > Emacs has a rather small developer base, and most of the developers > are fairly busy with other things. A project with lots of developers > that are more intensely involved in development is naturally going to > be more reponsive. > Certainly the tools make _some_ difference, but I think ESR is > drastically overestimating how much of one. If Emacs development were > at a faster pace (perhaps because the developer base change), then > maybe the tools would become a limiting factor, but I don't think they > are now. My feeling is that better tools would make a substantial difference - perhaps 25% better productivity for me - but nothing like an order of magnitude. Miles, why aren't we all switching to arch? Would it be appropriate for Emacs now? > [BTW, one thing I think _would_ be very handy, and easy to implement, > would be an IRC channel for Emacs developers, just for those random > questions you wanna get a quick answer to sometimes... There's #emacs > on irc.freenode.net, but it's more user-level.] Would anybody be listening? > -Miles -- Alan Mackenzie (Nuremberg, Germany).