Ihor Radchenko <yanta...@gmail.com> writes: > Familiarity is important.
I agree with all what you said. > Ideally, it would be nice to > have ML front-end that looks similar to GitHub issues. I recall the > latest versions of mailman had somewhat familiar look. Sourcehut is also > trying to implement a web-based front-end (though is it not familiar at > all, unfortunately). Note that if the GNU project moves to using its instance of sourcehut, then we will also benefit from such a web-based front-end. > Note that the opposite to the above is not true. We should not prefer > familiar front-ends at the cost of sacrificing technical accessibility. Agreed again. Another parameter I put in the equation: what do we want? If our priority were to redirect reports made on r/org-mode and SO to the Org maintainers, then switching to GitHub would probably be a good move: users that feel comfortable sharing reports and ideas on these platforms would create more issues on GitHub than emails we currently receive on the list. I believe our priority should be to motivate more Elisp hackers to become Org maintainers. I expect potential candidates to be okay with the GNU recommendation of trying to avoid GitHub for ethical reasons and to be fine with working by email, the old way. Especially if we have maintainers for small files: they certainly don't want to follow everything in Org's development but agree to be cc'ed occasionally. 2 cts, -- Bastien
