From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Eli Zaretskii Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Is it time to drop ChangeLogs? Date: Mon, 07 Mar 2016 18:28:09 +0200 Message-ID: <838u1uuuau.fsf@gnu.org> References: <56BE7E37.3090708@cs.ucla.edu> <4hd1rw1ubr.fsf@fencepost.gnu.org> <83vb50wxhv.fsf@gnu.org> <87y49vz4cg.fsf@acer.localhost.com> <64a52598-ad53-498c-993c-67d7827dbdfc@default> Reply-To: Eli Zaretskii NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1457368138 18398 80.91.229.3 (7 Mar 2016 16:28:58 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Mon, 7 Mar 2016 16:28:58 +0000 (UTC) Cc: rms@gnu.org, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: John Wiegley Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Mon Mar 07 17:28:57 2016 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1acy1b-0003ql-99 for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 07 Mar 2016 17:28:51 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:56849 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1acy1a-0006zv-MI for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Mon, 07 Mar 2016 11:28:50 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:54979) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1acy12-0006YY-CZ for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Mar 2016 11:28:17 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1acy10-0000yS-La for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 07 Mar 2016 11:28:16 -0500 Original-Received: from fencepost.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::e]:47034) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1acy0v-0000vf-Vw; Mon, 07 Mar 2016 11:28:10 -0500 Original-Received: from 84.94.185.246.cable.012.net.il ([84.94.185.246]:1289 helo=home-c4e4a596f7) by fencepost.gnu.org with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.82) (envelope-from ) id 1acy0o-0004fp-Ff; Mon, 07 Mar 2016 11:28:02 -0500 In-reply-to: (message from John Wiegley on Sun, 06 Mar 2016 16:15:14 -0800) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.2.x-3.x [generic] X-Received-From: 2001:4830:134:3::e X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 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.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:201052 Archived-At: > From: John Wiegley > Date: Sun, 06 Mar 2016 16:15:14 -0800 > Cc: 21998@debbugs.gnu.org, Lars Magne Ingebrigtsen , > Richard Stallman , Emacs developers > > I respect that Richard may use them in a constructive way, but he's no longer > doing the majority of the work on Emacs Neither are some of those who expressed their views here. Unlike Richard, those others cannot present a history of contributions and of leading the development that is anywhere near what Richard has on his record. > I want to choose the path that works for the core developers, and > will make Emacs more welcoming to new contributors. It is IMO a grave mistake to remove parts of our development process just because they need to be learned by new contributors. The result will be increased burden on the shoulders of those who review the submissions, due to the need to coach them, catch their mistakes, ask for re-submissions, etc. It will eventually be a net loss, because those contributors will not enjoy the need to produce several versions of the patch before it is admitted, and the reviewers will not enjoy the extra burden. We should consider each part of the development process on its own merit, first and foremost. If a part is useful, and its removal will make the quality of the code or the documentation lower, then it should not be removed, and new contributors will have to learn it and to live by it. There's no useful way into Emacs development that doesn't require negotiating a few barriers. No free lunch here (or anywhere). We should recognize this fact instead of trying to bury our head in the sand.