From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: phillip.lord@newcastle.ac.uk (Phillip Lord) Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: Re: Metaproblem, part 3 Date: Fri, 05 Dec 2014 12:09:09 +0000 Message-ID: <87wq66paca.fsf@newcastle.ac.uk> References: <20141203142859.24393.98673@vcs.savannah.gnu.org> <20141203193110.GF12748@thyrsus.com> <20141203215426.GA15791@thyrsus.com> <87ppbzplcw.fsf@newcastle.ac.uk> <83iohr48kr.fsf@gnu.org> <87egseqsa6.fsf@newcastle.ac.uk> <831toe4aai.fsf@gnu.org> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1417781429 22379 80.91.229.3 (5 Dec 2014 12:10:29 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Fri, 5 Dec 2014 12:10:29 +0000 (UTC) Cc: esr@thyrsus.com, joaotavora@gmail.com, emacs-devel@gnu.org To: Eli Zaretskii Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Fri Dec 05 13:10:22 2014 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 1XwriG-00040z-KG for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 05 Dec 2014 13:10:20 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:49990 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XwriF-0006ka-Sg for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Fri, 05 Dec 2014 07:10:19 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:47508) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XwrhK-0005ne-Cg for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 05 Dec 2014 07:09:27 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XwrhF-000285-JV for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 05 Dec 2014 07:09:22 -0500 Original-Received: from cheviot22.ncl.ac.uk ([128.240.234.22]:46950) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1XwrhA-00027B-3x; Fri, 05 Dec 2014 07:09:12 -0500 Original-Received: from smtpauth-vm.ncl.ac.uk ([10.8.233.129] helo=smtpauth.ncl.ac.uk) by cheviot22.ncl.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Xwrh8-0007Jf-Cx; Fri, 05 Dec 2014 12:09:10 +0000 Original-Received: from jangai.ncl.ac.uk ([10.66.67.223] helo=localhost) by smtpauth.ncl.ac.uk with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.63) (envelope-from ) id 1Xwrh7-0003jv-TZ; Fri, 05 Dec 2014 12:09:09 +0000 In-Reply-To: <831toe4aai.fsf@gnu.org> (Eli Zaretskii's message of "Fri, 5 Dec 2014 13:15:49 +0200") User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/24.3 (gnu/linux) X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.6.x X-Received-From: 128.240.234.22 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:178909 Archived-At: Eli Zaretskii writes: >> >> I've gone back and read what I wrote. I can't see where it is a gripe. > > I apologize for using the word "gripe". Let me rephrase: what is > missing in the current practices on emacs-devel to make them eligible > to be called "mentoring", in your opinion? Oh, well, the idea is that when someone wants to do something they get a person to talk to, to help them through, away from the main line traffic of emacs-devel. What is missing on the current emacs-devel? It's not that anything in missing, it's more the opposite. Emacs-devel is a high-traffic, complex mailing list with lots of discussion going on. The discussion can get heated also, but even when it's not it's somewhat intimidating; partly this is because of the high level of technical competance of many of the developers here. Obviously, having skilled developers is an asset to Emacs, but it can have some occasional consequences. Now, emacs-devel is not the worse I have seen. Years ago, I submitted a potential patch once to the cygwin mailing list. I would have been quite understanding of a "no, it does fit without objectives because of a, b and c". What I got was "no, and you would have known that it was going to be no, if you knew anything about it, which you would have, if you'd read the mailing list for several months before posting". I have commit rights to ELPA (and I guess therefore Emacs core). I've used the former, but never the latter, because I am worried about screwing things up. I never worried about this with cider, or clojure mode because I committed to my own repo and send a pull request (several of which were refused, with reasonable explanations as to why). >> It seems to me to be a positive suggestion. > > I didn't perceive it as negative. I just didn't understand what was > being suggested in practical terms. Please elaborate. I hope that I have. Probably I talk to much, and don't code enough, so after this I will take Stefan's advice and do some more of the latter. Phil