Thomas S. Dye <tsd@tsdye.online> writes:
>> Follow up: What should be the response to "noise", because I don't think >> it should be a cold shoulder. >> > Agreed. I'm trying to put myself in the maintainers' shoes. They volunteer > lots of highly skilled time, which I admire greatly. I can imagine a > situation > where a patch falls outside a maintainer's interest and they have difficulty > finding the time to understand it and offer a meaningful critique. > > Historical note: when Carsten took his leave and announced Bastien would > maintain Org mode, I jumped in noisily to suggest that a committee approach > might be better. I couldn't imagine a world with two Carstens! It appears > there is a committee of sorts now, though I'm in the dark how it is organized. > Assuming there is a committee, perhaps addition of an Initial Patch Reviewer > might be a good idea? I desperately need to head to bed, so I'll make this quick, but I think the unclear structure doesn't help. Often I'm at a loss as to whether a patch has been left for Bastien to take a look at, overlooked, rejected without comment, or what.* Crucially, in any of those cases I think the contributor deserves to know. I think responding to a first-time contribution with silence is more likely to push someone away than any other effect. Org development may be slowing down/refocusing, but I don't think that means we should disregard new volunteered effort. A clearly layed out structure and set of roles sounds like it could be helpful to me. > All the best, > Tom -- Timothy * I happen to be currently feeling this with the set of patches I recently sent in. One was responded to and merged, another had a burst of replies but seems to be left in limbo/waiting for Bastien?, and then I have 4 others which I am just *hoping* will eventually be noticed / responded to. It's not a good feeling, and it's part of whats prompted me to send the original email.
