From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.ciao.gmane.io!not-for-mail From: Yuan Fu Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Why are so many great packages not trying to get included in GNU Emacs? WAS: Re: Making Emacs more friendly to newcomers Date: Sat, 20 Jun 2020 21:37:02 -0400 Message-ID: <5EEE3785-D1EB-40A2-AA91-10E97C68ABBB@gmail.com> References: <87k12bdgx7.fsf@yahoo.com> <87r1wi7a8o.fsf@yahoo.com> <875zdteybt.fsf@runbox.com> <87368wrvf5.fsf@yahoo.com> <86k126d83n.wl-me@enzu.ru> <83pnbyckvv.fsf@gnu.org> <4923d7e98f5ed816a7569093dbc673153adcea88.camel@yandex.ru> <874krex73o.fsf@gmail.com> <87eeqctgb4.fsf@elephly.net> <83wo43xom6.fsf@gnu.org> <83r1u9vnr3.fsf@gnu.org> <09632e8ec343ddee558b18f811ef6da77e594f55.camel@yandex.ru> <83pn9tvhta.fsf@gnu.org> <83mu4xvari.fsf@gnu.org> <1faa5c4154ea49a2d10d16741dfad8451ef27abd.camel@yandex.ru> Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 13.4 \(3608.80.23.2.2\)) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Apple-Mail=_6C6B6BCF-EBFF-4DBE-9E8C-2A38F989D592" Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="ciao.gmane.io:159.69.161.202"; logging-data="19741"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Stefan Kangas , emacs-devel , rekado@elephly.net, =?utf-8?B?Sm/Do28gVMOhdm9yYQ==?= , dgutov@yandex.ru, Eli Zaretskii To: Konstantin Kharlamov Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Jun 21 03:37:51 2020 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 1jmove-00052g-KR for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 21 Jun 2020 03:37:50 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:55372 helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jmovd-0007uh-Me for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sat, 20 Jun 2020 21:37:49 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]:59748) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jmoux-0006Zs-VJ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 20 Jun 2020 21:37:08 -0400 Original-Received: from mail-qk1-x732.google.com ([2607:f8b0:4864:20::732]:34421) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_128_GCM_SHA256:128) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1jmouv-0006Ig-NV; Sat, 20 Jun 2020 21:37:07 -0400 Original-Received: by mail-qk1-x732.google.com with SMTP id f18so12659610qkh.1; Sat, 20 Jun 2020 18:37:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20161025; h=from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date:in-reply-to:cc:to :references; bh=NP7rkfxOp+Q+wYvUDqmrGCzAWbcjIyzozflEBCcjnk0=; b=ajb9sbtiUYHkGgiKLwSnzcfvJIgD3lPS6L7Fpynzklka7DKGdfG4vClshVEmFMQtvn 8ag1YBECO172/Eho80NJQ8WhPjfRfAO9vNsGlpmd7Xvx63WvFp/YDOcK1e4XM7G6BOG6 Qzw4mtyErznxRmnW1PVouxn0YhBd1b5jIpvCrKG9bUSbtHJezJrg92fpzDAE+y7EOn4S KMJCNnz46Wut8CG1YtM5a0viHSJYxkKujdog78VMZRKW6vMUTeNjF+TaBquzgLliRXSX R4LvwkhvN9P0ICcUxiulEbijo/BlvnFvRpWZGaxQ371e6Y78SF3qRDHkWjEOCb7KkeKJ l/ZQ== X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=1e100.net; s=20161025; h=x-gm-message-state:from:message-id:mime-version:subject:date :in-reply-to:cc:to:references; bh=NP7rkfxOp+Q+wYvUDqmrGCzAWbcjIyzozflEBCcjnk0=; b=rrHrwG17Fp1w7frCIxy93V9MImoJTBaClivSuH+w1LHt2qIhS8RdC3SnW+F6fuW7kf PT3i4afrsAk3Uy0kki6od8f24Qx4mOBW13kVEWp04eyXKGNkMm5vKuf/VNRNS4wU87Ue twp5FVmrqychpxQYKvITJbXqLFgLfUrmbAkhEKN/vIr+qvOIxcP5NzfT2qSjNUWI3ecF 00sDe+J11nbkVvHRzMjoomYD+fJg3vfR8ZyayUG6LT1dGKc6g9ZlQ/9hnDeO7n4QQrO0 GN2SWd6feqiiWyZsFeDeVeLIxyvdph0ol9aTHFA2GHInqHIZd2XjGeVtLUFGyOe6kLVx gcXw== X-Gm-Message-State: AOAM532x7lXjOVXvcAV6DomNYQvBLTxhk2KGXTL5DpstKrRcfJzoxJ9X HT8xaSA14jiXPTsLxCaA0Ss= X-Google-Smtp-Source: ABdhPJxHhyZ1C9Qv1OGzyEsxpyQEV+js6RpEZp5EeiIFs3zJGxyfXEdsktnphEUyHr3EL0VbfpQ1iA== X-Received: by 2002:a05:620a:222c:: with SMTP id n12mr7677179qkh.210.1592703424021; Sat, 20 Jun 2020 18:37:04 -0700 (PDT) Original-Received: from ?IPv6:2601:98a:4200:9210:4db3:689a:8b65:21d1? ([2601:98a:4200:9210:4db3:689a:8b65:21d1]) by smtp.gmail.com with ESMTPSA id e16sm11811403qtc.71.2020.06.20.18.37.02 (version=TLS1_2 cipher=ECDHE-ECDSA-AES128-GCM-SHA256 bits=128/128); Sat, 20 Jun 2020 18:37:03 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <1faa5c4154ea49a2d10d16741dfad8451ef27abd.camel@yandex.ru> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3608.80.23.2.2) Received-SPF: pass client-ip=2607:f8b0:4864:20::732; envelope-from=casouri@gmail.com; helo=mail-qk1-x732.google.com X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: No matching host in p0f cache. That's all we know. X-Spam_score_int: -20 X-Spam_score: -2.1 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.1 / 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, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=_AUTOLEARN 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:252477 Archived-At: --Apple-Mail=_6C6B6BCF-EBFF-4DBE-9E8C-2A38F989D592 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 >=20 >>> git log -500 --format=3D"%ae" | grep -vP >>> = "@\S*(redhat|arm|suse|google|gnu|adacore|alibaba|intel|ibm|apple|linaro|hu= aw >>> ei|c >>> = odesourcery|golang|sony|amd|chromium|nvidia|loongson|accesssoftek|ubisoft|= mi >>> cros >>> = oft|fb|energize|comstyle|nextsilicon|quicinc|azul|gentoo|graphcore|gdcproj= ec >>> t|si >>> five)\.(org|com|de|cz|cn)" | sort -u | wc -l >>>=20 >>> Results are: >>> * GCC as of commit 445d8da5fbd: 15 >>> * Clang as of commit 7b201bfcac2: 49 >>>=20 >>> This is some pretty big difference! If I expand the commits range, = the >>> difference increases further. >>=20 >> GCC is alive for 33 years, so I think your theory eats dust. Many of >> the GCC and GDB developers get paid for their work, but that doesn't >> mean the project is less viable, and the long history of both GCC and >> GDB is the proof. >=20 > Okay, let me say beforehand that both GCC and Clang are very active = projects > right now. Just in case, so there's no misunderstanding. >=20 > So, times are changing. In older times there were no standard to = development, > Git was not as popular, development practices are varied too. So, as = long you > could get your patch to a project, any odd contribution requirements = were fine, > they hardly would set a barrier. >=20 > But these days Git got over all other VCSes (and for a reason), so = using SVN or > Perforce, or whatever, is a barrier to contribution. 12 years ago = Github was > founded, and then also the open-source clone Gitlab appeared. These = two pretty > much set the standard development model nowadays (for a reason too). = There still > are projects that use other models, but this is a barrier to = contributors. >=20 > What I'm getting at is that your reasoning that since GCC is 33 years = old it > will live on does not work. For a project to "live on" it needs to be = active. > Sure GCC is active! But its activity mainly stems from paid people and > maintainers. Whereas in Clang a large chunk of it stems from = contributors. Let > me repeat, paid people come and go, so do maintainers (they may burn = out, or > just move on). These contributors are the ones who will become new = maintainers > and the ones who advertise the project in their environment. >=20 > I hope it makes clear the future of what project looks brighter. I think the point is not =E2=80=9Cthis works for a long time and it must = be better than new stuff=E2=80=9D but rather the current method _can_ = live long (proven by gcc & gdb, etc). If in the future people moves to = other shiny new SVN=E2=80=99s and github=E2=80=99s, does the git method = still work?=20 Yuan= --Apple-Mail=_6C6B6BCF-EBFF-4DBE-9E8C-2A38F989D592 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=utf-8

   git log -500 --format=3D"%ae" | grep -vP
"@\S*(redhat|arm|suse|google|gnu|adacore|alibaba|intel|ibm|appl= e|linaro|huaw
ei|c
odesourcery|golang|sony|amd|chromium|nvidia|loongson|accesssoft= ek|ubisoft|mi
cros
oft|fb|energize|comstyle|nextsilicon|quicinc|azul|gentoo|graphc= ore|gdcprojec
t|si
five)\.(org|com|de|cz|cn)" = | sort -u | wc -l

Results are:
* GCC as of commit 445d8da5fbd: 15
* Clang as = of commit 7b201bfcac2: 49

This is some = pretty big difference! If I expand the commits range, the
difference increases further.

GCC is alive for 33 years, so I think your theory eats dust. =  Many of
the GCC and GDB developers get paid for = their work, but that doesn't
mean the project is less = viable, and the long history of both GCC and
GDB is the = proof.

Okay, let me say beforehand that both GCC and Clang are very = active projects
right now. Just in case, so there's no = misunderstanding.

So, times are changing. In older times there were no standard = to development,
Git was not as popular, development practices are varied too. = So, as long you
could get your patch to a project, any odd contribution = requirements were fine,
they hardly would set a barrier.

But these days Git got over all other VCSes (and for a = reason), so using SVN or
Perforce, or whatever, is a barrier to contribution. 12 years = ago Github was
founded, and then also the open-source clone Gitlab appeared. = These two pretty
much set the standard development model nowadays (for a = reason too). There still
are projects that use other models, but this is a barrier to = contributors.

What I'm getting at is that your reasoning that since GCC is = 33 years old it
will live on does not work. For a project to "live on" it = needs to be active.
Sure GCC is active! But its activity mainly stems from paid = people and
maintainers. Whereas in Clang a large chunk of it stems from = contributors. Let
me repeat, paid people come and go, so do maintainers (they = may burn out, or
just move on). These contributors are the ones who will = become new maintainers
and the ones who advertise the project in their = environment.

I hope it makes clear the future of what project looks = brighter.

I think the point is not =E2=80=9Cthis works = for a long time and it must be better than new stuff=E2=80=9D but rather = the current method _can_ live long (proven by gcc & gdb, etc). If in = the future people moves to other shiny new SVN=E2=80=99s and github=E2=80=99= s, does the git method still work? 

Yuan
= --Apple-Mail=_6C6B6BCF-EBFF-4DBE-9E8C-2A38F989D592--