From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.io!.POSTED.blaine.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Ihor Radchenko Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: emacs-devel/debbugs communication (was: New Package for NonGNU-ELPA: clojure-ts-mode) Date: Sun, 03 Sep 2023 08:32:16 +0000 Message-ID: <87wmx7mzcf.fsf@localhost> References: <87il9kksqz.fsf@dfreeman.email> <83350ncbns.fsf@gnu.org> <87cyzrjbd8.fsf@dfreeman.email> <83zg2vav46.fsf@gnu.org> <87o7j99304.fsf@dfreeman.email> <97224c4f-fad4-ae01-46c1-5755d97d9a92@gutov.dev> <87fs3ztq38.fsf@localhost> <87cyz3qwba.fsf@posteo.net> <8734zztmiz.fsf@localhost> <87sf7zqs3l.fsf@yahoo.com> <87il8vs6e7.fsf@localhost> <87jztbqrc9.fsf@yahoo.com> <877cpbs5a0.fsf@localhost> <87fs3zqqgj.fsf@yahoo.com> <874jkfs4o0.fsf@localhost> <87y1hroz47.fsf@posteo.net> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: ciao.gmane.io; posting-host="blaine.gmane.org:116.202.254.214"; logging-data="3371"; mail-complaints-to="usenet@ciao.gmane.io" Cc: Jens Schmidt , emacs-devel@gnu.org, manuel.uberti@inventati.org To: rms@gnu.org Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Sun Sep 03 10:32:32 2023 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 1qciX2-0000ic-GF for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; Sun, 03 Sep 2023 10:32:32 +0200 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qciWG-0001dN-PA; Sun, 03 Sep 2023 04:31:44 -0400 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:470:142:3::10]) by lists.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qciWC-0001Yr-PD for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 03 Sep 2023 04:31:42 -0400 Original-Received: from mout01.posteo.de ([185.67.36.65]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qciW9-00040s-8Z for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 03 Sep 2023 04:31:40 -0400 Original-Received: from submission (posteo.de [185.67.36.169]) by mout01.posteo.de (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 6B75B240027 for ; Sun, 3 Sep 2023 10:31:34 +0200 (CEST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=posteo.net; s=2017; t=1693729894; bh=eN2AH/NK6wDnWv8jCqJ4TnsgftPXGtlffpT3jtrjMII=; h=From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:Message-ID:MIME-Version:From; b=mQ2oHbLVt07jPNd/NAh0SAvor7NAjY6FX+OVXuc2LIeWrrus2tvw3IxzdxknRBx0H e58J4plCYB5Qriznm//u948uNk5fERM3XXyP7XPbNQBVAYeYpIXoLK9BxLqjGIzX4A GDWhlNY0STTtNQ9IVzKpU4QVTIAAyEi/dBNZfY8gN7fntTsb+zwZHpBuAwvlE5yQAW W3SMxCJ9dxyUVwBmDLal8Q2pTDqIOX9q+0vSjkZ1WOderjNYmrtnyhBMeT0cbgXbZK /UWZp+fCJVq8XgdGphBnsy0b8ECpTJZXqydM2yG5L3Gv/SGcsv0yyZCYRmvExJ2vKP MuLKcn7JDAb4Q== Original-Received: from customer (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by submission (posteo.de) with ESMTPSA id 4RdlNj1Byfz9rxD; Sun, 3 Sep 2023 10:31:32 +0200 (CEST) In-Reply-To: Received-SPF: pass client-ip=185.67.36.65; envelope-from=yantar92@posteo.net; helo=mout01.posteo.de X-Spam_score_int: -43 X-Spam_score: -4.4 X-Spam_bar: ---- X-Spam_report: (-4.4 / 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, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H5=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=unavailable autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action 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-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane-mx.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.io gmane.emacs.devel:309939 Archived-At: Richard Stallman writes: > > Exactly. TBH I still have to assemble courage to post here. All these > > top dogs with their super-dry yet elaborate communication style are > > surely, um, intimidating. > > That is not a good thing. Maybe we can continue on the path of the Kind > Communication Guidelines (https://gnu.org/philosophy/kind-communication.html) > to make emacs-devel less intimidating. > > Would you like to start accumulating a list of examples that do, > or did in the past, feel intimidating to you? We could learn ommething > from that. I can share some subjective experience: Sometimes, the replies to proposals/reports have a tone that is seemingly rejecting compromises. There are two aspects to this impression: 1. Maintainers often say "no" to certain things (like code refactoring that does not lead to any clear improvement) because they know from their extensive experience that some ideas are "non-starters". However, they do not elaborate much why one or another thing is not acceptable. Not elaborating is actually perfectly understandable - it would be annoying to repeat the same thing many times and would also waste the maintainer's valuable time that could be spent for something more productive. Though some kind of FAQ might be useful to lead people to more detailed explanations. Pointing "this has been discussed many times in the past" feels intimidating as it is not always clear how to find the previous conclusions of "discussed many times" in the large volume of emacs-devel archives. 2. The previous point feels even worse when there is miscommunication and the rigid "no" (or other assertions) is coming from misunderstanding each other. For example, https://yhetil.org/emacs-devel/83czffzo73.fsf@gnu.org/ thread was quite hard to manage, partially because of such mis-communication. It took a few, sometimes heated, exchanges until we figured out the misunderstanding in https://yhetil.org/emacs-devel/87v8szrfz6.fsf@localhost/ 3. Sometimes, replies to certain feature request feel like a show stopper not because the feature itself is not acceptable, but because the specific implementation is not deemed good. A recent example is https://debbugs.gnu.org/cgi/bugreport.cgi?bug=65451#26, where I somehow _felt_ like my proposal cannot be accepted at all. Which was not true, as an alternative implementation of the same feature was more as rigidly rejected. Maybe it is just me, but it was quite emotionally difficult to keep the discussion going and constructive. -- Ihor Radchenko // yantar92, Org mode contributor, Learn more about Org mode at . Support Org development at , or support my work at