From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp11.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:403:478a::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by ms9.migadu.com with LMTPS id oAvWFOo8CGWjPQEA9RJhRA:P1 (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 18 Sep 2023 14:04:58 +0200 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:403:478a::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp11.migadu.com with LMTPS id oAvWFOo8CGWjPQEA9RJhRA (envelope-from ) for ; Mon, 18 Sep 2023 14:04:58 +0200 Received: from lists.gnu.org (lists.gnu.org [209.51.188.17]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by aspmx1.migadu.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id E3C67FA49 for ; Mon, 18 Sep 2023 14:04:57 +0200 (CEST) Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=riseup.net header.s=squak header.b=HPHGqOYx; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=riseup.net; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1695038698; h=from:from:sender:sender:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date: message-id:message-id:to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version: content-type:content-type:in-reply-to:in-reply-to: references:references:list-id:list-help:list-unsubscribe: list-subscribe:list-post:dkim-signature; bh=ZyZz9SnMYFEpbX7G1+1N9J4V3x8JB84Ro5A0tcV0tPQ=; b=NzhKYgWStGT+zpBXkHFKnolid8cq/zP0XKtGbP0/JA9zMEqFB32rYsHZp5cIiTrRhn0jun pDt2CPdftbCvBBILMzCfR3n0yf5Uy//9nGlfrHZdK98ay/H+bXKFQAgZWdREeDoWaNdxr3 Wy1sqekCBBjoNZ/RI3qTlRToi3Thk0I9LguaWqxBdgXBBMTC1jdH+fcb2NgRPe5FiqaShY WUuksoVSwkp8bSzr2jTbkcT9C6Pf1SatM7ao7IHKlI2AFc56F2e/S/LrjhJDhdH9Fi/R9O dCbYcpJlYdG5Oc/I/lV0o9g5Koeo75OORu0lZ5bvSmJDgdDbNczGwsLQPqrGkw== ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1695038698; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=M5j67DQduFonlJSBgqMPJYBn1v6NY23fOO0TJ+9eTo3qIBY8YYuowJNUOh4F+5rHA7Ztpu KBdShviWD9rYHKZQUTGTqP5AEnr7+6cR0CThCEZ6HiPt3c+hzQhWijypqky6SIwf1R/N7P eoMkuXM9LUO2wUp9McjV4YyDRVI/rFyvChjd4x3FHaMe7L04612rqHty5zwkjqxDPtYimd Uz4ZFTIWt9/h9k/cVEwEhRwUEAnyXbf2rQDvkXapJ09e+6RqvRBpDa4fi4KukHKgOUplA2 M74ZcPqm8Z31PMiAQs8St0tnVruHMWIXocIIgfusiALAz3tb19tMLm+UbIQTbQ== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=pass header.d=riseup.net header.s=squak header.b=HPHGqOYx; dmarc=pass (policy=none) header.from=riseup.net; spf=pass (aspmx1.migadu.com: domain of "guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" designates 209.51.188.17 as permitted sender) smtp.mailfrom="guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org" Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qiCz1-0005C9-HZ; Mon, 18 Sep 2023 08:04:07 -0400 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 1qiCyy-0005Bz-DY for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Sep 2023 08:04:04 -0400 Received: from mx1.riseup.net ([198.252.153.129]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qiCyv-0000JD-QC for guix-devel@gnu.org; Mon, 18 Sep 2023 08:04:04 -0400 Received: from fews02-sea.riseup.net (fews02-sea-pn.riseup.net [10.0.1.112]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits) key-exchange X25519 server-signature RSA-PSS (2048 bits) server-digest SHA256) (No client certificate requested) by mx1.riseup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 4Rq3Nv0rchzDqs2; Mon, 18 Sep 2023 12:03:59 +0000 (UTC) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=riseup.net; s=squak; t=1695038639; bh=Yd4cq6TNMfqYd3MjmZUYcYz0w2MaGhCyIAM7MSkMszg=; h=References:From:To:Cc:Subject:Date:In-reply-to:From; b=HPHGqOYxCZdE48B/IBQTnupNsuWDGm5tHBns4cPXMIdR62vsCv4oq6KVIZLEJnBz6 eYOyUGapa/pKfqLPt5aVQBMRix1pdBTGxNBoMRjWcMb8eNlADgLR7v72mzckVtRvew sWoXSgj/y49vhsf6elZKUQ3WpH05W/bcOSX+P3DE= X-Riseup-User-ID: DA20F714D56B2E92D339519DA23401B452466897A58DF94875B40152377B3660 Received: from [127.0.0.1] (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by fews02-sea.riseup.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id 4Rq3Ng2q8gzFrx3; Mon, 18 Sep 2023 12:03:47 +0000 (UTC) References: <87y1h6qjxl.fsf@wmeyer.eu> From: Peter Pronai To: Wilko Meyer Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Subject: Re: Guix Survey (follow up on "How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for contributors?") Date: Mon, 18 Sep 2023 14:02:10 +0200 In-reply-to: <87y1h6qjxl.fsf@wmeyer.eu> Message-ID: MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Received-SPF: pass client-ip=198.252.153.129; envelope-from=raingloom@riseup.net; helo=mx1.riseup.net X-Spam_score_int: -27 X-Spam_score: -2.8 X-Spam_bar: -- X-Spam_report: (-2.8 / 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_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H3=0.001, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_WL=0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no X-Spam_action: no action X-BeenThere: guix-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29 Precedence: list List-Id: "Development of GNU Guix and the GNU System distribution." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org Sender: guix-devel-bounces+larch=yhetil.org@gnu.org X-Migadu-Flow: FLOW_IN X-Migadu-Country: US X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -4.55 X-Spam-Score: -4.55 X-Migadu-Queue-Id: E3C67FA49 X-Migadu-Scanner: mx0.migadu.com X-TUID: RaAOJfWVn4d4 Wilko Meyer writes: > Hi Guix, > > I haven't had enough time to read up on every topic that has been > mentioned in the "How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for > contributors?" discussion as at some point it got quite a lot to > follow. At one point[0] there was a discussion on having a survey to get > a better picture on and quantify what potential blockers are to engage > with/contribute to Guix; which seems, if done right (as surveys have to > be carefully crafted), a good idea; especially with the prospect of > repeating it annually as a means to check if issues got > better/priorities in Guixes userbase change and so on. If there's a > consensus on doing this, I'd be happy to contribute some of my time to > get things going (would creating a issue on guixes bug tracker for this > topic be a good idea? how are these non-code contrib. topics handled?). > > Before writing this mail, I had a look on how other projects handle > these kind of surveys, in particular: > > - the emacs user survey[1] > - the nix community survey[2] > - the curl user survey[3] > - the fennel survey[4] > > I identified a few key themes that could be useful for a guix user > survey as well. I plan on doing a more extensive summary on this later > this weekend if my time allows it, for now a loose collection of > ideas/list of what, in my subjective opinion, stood out and what most > surveys had in common should do to hopefully get a discussion on this > started: > > - the emacs user survey specifically asked for elisp profiency; mapping > out the Guile profiency of guixes community could be feasible. > - fennel as well as emacs had questions on which programming languages > their community uses; in the regards on recent discussions on > guix-devel on developer ecosystems[4] this could help to identify if > there are any shortcomings in providing importers/packages for certain > languages that may be used by guix users. > - the nix survey specifically asked for the environments and context nix > is being used in; it'd be interesting to see where and for what > purpose people are using Guix. > - most surveys had, some more some less extensive, demographic > questions and questions mapping out how many years people have been > programming. > > Specifially in the lights of the original discussion/regarding > contributions: > > - I think that the "Where do you discuss Fennel or interact with other > Fennel developers" question of fennels survey should be asked for guix > as well, to get a grasp on which platforms are being used to discuss > all things guix. > - the curl user survey[6] did a pretty good job in mapping out what > prevents users from contributing (p.20) as well as mapping out what > areas of the project are regarding as good/which have room for > improvements (p.24-26) > - fennel asked for "the biggest problems you have using Fennel", it had > a "If you haven't hacked on Fennel itself, why not?" question as > well. I personally think this could be good to assess potential pain > points/blockers for Guix as well. Fennel also asked for "favorite > features" which could be a nice way to map out which parts of Guix are > popular. > > Last, the nix user survey allowed free-form responses. Having a > qualitative research component to a survey could help getting better > results (especially when identifying problems in using guix/blockers in > contributing and so on); but evaluating these is pretty time extensive > and dependant on how much resources people have to compile a list of > findings/results from a prospective survey. > > What could the next steps be to get this going? > > [0]: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2023-09/msg00086.html > [1]: https://emacssurvey.org/ > [2]: https://discourse.nixos.org/t/2022-nix-survey-results/18983 > [3]: https://daniel.haxx.se/blog/2022/06/16/curl-user-survey-2022-analysis/ > [4]: https://fennel-lang.org/survey/2022 > [5]: https://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/guix-devel/2023-07/msg00152.html > [6]: https://daniel.haxx.se/media/curl-user-survey-2023-analysis.pdf I definitely vote for having a free form field too, and also an extra one for feedback on the survey. It might not be easy to turn it into quantitative data, but if a lot of people mention certain key words, that should be both easy to grep for and very apparent even for a casual reader.