From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Return-Path: Received: from mp10.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 qAyCBcI/6WSYCgEAG6o9tA:P1 (envelope-from ) for ; Sat, 26 Aug 2023 01:56:50 +0200 Received: from aspmx1.migadu.com ([2001:41d0:403:478a::]) (using TLSv1.3 with cipher TLS_AES_256_GCM_SHA384 (256/256 bits)) by mp10.migadu.com with LMTPS id qAyCBcI/6WSYCgEAG6o9tA (envelope-from ) for ; Sat, 26 Aug 2023 01:56:50 +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 083046B3F5 for ; Sat, 26 Aug 2023 01:56:50 +0200 (CEST) Authentication-Results: aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; 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"; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (relaxed), No valid DKIM" header.from=gmail.com (policy=none) ARC-Seal: i=1; s=key1; d=yhetil.org; t=1693007810; a=rsa-sha256; cv=none; b=OGVuvm6B6rLXSTqpeRYkolL/Nq08sXCm98ATHfscEFIZerIf9Sq3ry/vWWXDvP5XNuTkeF J9ObtrmM4rJ3BVeOSKJQufdq7ZBCtWmeiuU7ZK9UKU8jRD0aqYGT/Wa2brtjLHbVfIkrHz frtuhHhJsItKE82+GUBVv3bDjJ5FgJPhoX2KVcUQysm9W2awskpLNl27OvUP1xvO6/Zyr0 i8TcgWPCDhXD/Yoo5YZ5dy9s+D3fcNNEJNpunn2qS/Aa+2V7aIXIIFKibxHQMxmwjzJks+ uWwUgFPd5W0CtJYn7oRCTUrLxA9Ff6UbsZC0mk1BdeyZKHrCKLVQnS74F3iscA== ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; aspmx1.migadu.com; dkim=none; 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"; dmarc=fail reason="SPF not aligned (relaxed), No valid DKIM" header.from=gmail.com (policy=none) ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=yhetil.org; s=key1; t=1693007810; 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: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references:list-id:list-help: list-unsubscribe:list-subscribe:list-post; bh=OsWno8orcQVpWb0xPMykQao7UFQVFThGNHNVbYgGp4Q=; b=HuEZ1C1ZBTFLnfwV/EHU2tZS5Lpu3S4L/lhukFatguWyb/KNeuwHP8e40TF8ajUr2qGJ2K QRoTGRze0rlAAu7BIxBnwwoBrLRbFAjXz5qGyiI3rXCdU5hnrKwGCsoJxG7qZDP1slKeBH 08vjjEGBwAbWt3NTsBs3ONtxnvvaEw+MjVLqiEf54jCD2cJKX0HXmOd8WF4tURVGAQ2vV2 9T6/OdxKj/GgptVfuZQiikV0GhCKMFfz+FIqVvTaiUwelEiqIVRODUwdqDUpMpPPCE1KtB DFgTk+Y4bnFcmTmJA95Pwsbhm3+s9OOhphMgvujJLrs6FA2KgrBzC7E85ExIhg== Received: from localhost ([::1] helo=lists1p.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qZgfR-0002MR-Eq; Fri, 25 Aug 2023 19:56:41 -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 1qZgfO-0002M7-TA for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 25 Aug 2023 19:56:39 -0400 Received: from ciao.gmane.io ([116.202.254.214]) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtps (TLS1.2:ECDHE_RSA_AES_256_GCM_SHA384:256) (Exim 4.90_1) (envelope-from ) id 1qZgfM-0006ip-SQ for guix-devel@gnu.org; Fri, 25 Aug 2023 19:56:38 -0400 Received: from list by ciao.gmane.io with local (Exim 4.92) (envelope-from ) id 1qZgfK-0002yg-13 for guix-devel@gnu.org; Sat, 26 Aug 2023 01:56:34 +0200 X-Injected-Via-Gmane: http://gmane.org/ To: guix-devel@gnu.org From: Katherine Cox-Buday Subject: Re: How can we decrease the cognitive overhead for contributors? Date: Fri, 25 Aug 2023 17:56:28 -0600 Message-ID: References: Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.13.0 Cc: guix-devel@gnu.org Content-Language: en-US In-Reply-To: Received-SPF: pass client-ip=116.202.254.214; envelope-from=gcggd-guix-devel@m.gmane-mx.org; helo=ciao.gmane.io X-Spam_score_int: -10 X-Spam_score: -1.1 X-Spam_bar: - X-Spam_report: (-1.1 / 5.0 requ) BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.001, FORGED_GMAIL_RCVD=1, FREEMAIL_FORGED_FROMDOMAIN=0.249, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, HEADER_FROM_DIFFERENT_DOMAINS=0.249, NICE_REPLY_A=-1.57, NML_ADSP_CUSTOM_MED=0.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001 autolearn=no 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-Scanner: mx0.migadu.com X-Spam-Score: -1.67 X-Migadu-Queue-Id: 083046B3F5 X-Migadu-Spam-Score: -1.67 X-TUID: oJOTBovuEKFM On 8/25/23 3:57 AM, Attila Lendvai wrote: >> Otherwise I do not get your point: I keep untreated messages with the latest >> patch version in my Guix inbox, and file away the others in a separate mbox. >> So things are not flat, but have two levels: "to be treated" or "done". > > > my point is that in a PR based model/workflow things like this is done by a program. and each brain cycle you spend on maintaining the sanity of your local inbox, is not spent on hacking, and the results of your effort is not even mirrored into the inbox of the other contributors. I was reflecting on what it is about the email-based workflow that I find difficult, and I think you've highlighted one thing: With a PR based workflow, there is a program essentially figuring out the equivalent of the `git send-email` flags and doing the submission for me. I generally go to the site for a repo's main branch, get prompted about my recent branch, click a button, and it's submitted. And you've also highlighted the core of my original message: it's frustrating to spend effort on the meta of changing code instead of changing code. There will always be ancillary effort, but it can be greatly reduced. > this seems like a small thing, but multiply this with every message, and every potential contributor and maintainer... and then consider its cumulative effect on the emergent order that we call the Guix community. A thousand times this. > > meta: > > the reason i'm contributing to this discussion is not that i'm proposing to move to some specific other platform right now. it's rather to nudge the consensus away from the conclusion that the email based workflow is good and is worth sticking with. > > once/if we get closer that consensus, only then should the discussion move on to collect our requirements and evaluate the free sw solutions that are available today. which again could be organized much better in a wiki than in email threads, but that's yet another topic... I just want to call out that my original message was not strictly about the email based workflow. I want reduction of cognitive overhead to be an ongoing goal, whatever that comes to mean. -- Katherine