Re: participation & contribution [was: Latest changes with lisp/uni-*.el and leim/quail]

[Jarek Czekalski <jarekczek@poczta.onet.pl>]

W dniu 11/30/2013 09:43 AM, Dani Moncayo pisze:
>> Glenn's frustration (which I share) is that here's an Emacs
>> _developer_ who has write access to the repository, and is quite
>> capable of doing the 5-sec commit job, but refuses to do so on some
>> ^%$#@! principle and lame excuses.
>>
>> IOW, he is publicly demonstrating his attitude to the project, asking
>> others (whose plate is much more full than his, and whose time is more
>> sparse than his) to act as his dutiful servants.
> With all due respect, Eli.  I'm sorry that you think so.
>
> I want to contribute to Emacs, while at the same time using the VCS I
> like.  Just that.  The only drawback of that approach is that every
> now and then some other developer would have to commit some patch of
> mine.  I think it is a reasonable tradeoff.
>
>

I have also another idea of fair approach. If you, Dani, don't want to 
learn bzr, others may not want to waste time on commiting patches that 
are not useful to them. At this moment these are the patches regarding 
git things.

The best user is such that brings only pluses to the project, without 
intended minuses. If one says "I'm helping, but I'll never learn bzr and 
you have to commit my patches if you want them", they bring a delibarate 
minus to the project, decreasing other developer's time. Eli supported.

It's hard to judge for me, a newcomer, whether Dani's pluses largely 
outweight minuses, but in general a developer should be able to work on 
their own. Still exceptions may be done for some honorable or valueable 
people. It would be best if one of the developer's declared: "I'll be 
commiting every patch of Dani. My time is worth less than his, so I'll 
be doing it instead of him". On the other hand, saying: "**someone** 
should be commiting it, because his work is good" is unfair too.

Jarek