Hi! ⛄ Ricardo Wurmus <rek...@elephly.net> skribis:
> Maxim Cournoyer <maxim.courno...@gmail.com> writes: [...] >> We'd have to include every language/system of importance to that list >> (Python, Ruby, Emacs, LaTeX, Perl, etc.), no? > > No, only those where we already have the people who could form a team. > There is no need for any of this to be comprehensive. It just needs to > be an improvement over the status quo. +1 > FWIW, I’ll gladly make it official that I could be the person to talk to > when it comes to “R packaging”. This is already the case, but only > those people know it who don’t really need to know this. Yes, and… > Advertising this kind of information or recording it somewhere where our > tools could redirect incoming requests would be an improvement. … yes; see also “The Tyranny of Structurelessness”. All this looks fine to us insiders because we know the untold structure of group; to outsiders though, it makes it harder to join. It’s about making space for newcomers. > I do think it’s a lack of organization, yes. Today I’m no longer > following guix-commits, guix-patches, or bug-guix, and I’m overwhelmed > by guix-devel and help-guix. Whenever something catches my attention > I’ll read a bit and maybe reply. But by far the best way to get my > attention for a review is to ask on #guix or #guix-hpc or to > X-Debbugs-Cc (or Cc) me on emails. I suppose people could explicitly Cc: the team you’re on when they need specific advice or review; that should already help. > Having some topic-specific streams I could tap into would allow me to be > a little more proactive. This brings a related but slightly different topic: how to let people filter incoming patches and bug reports in general. How does it even work on git*.com? Do they let you subscribe to issues/merge requests that match certain patterns or touch certain files? Thanks, Ludo’.
