Hi Oswald, > and who makes *that* call? where do you draw the line? it doesn't appear > magically, somebody with the competence and guts (=> authority) has to > do it.
If you're bold enough (devs/committers are :)), you'll do it. > ... but the simple fact is that there is nobody here > who wants the job and is up to it, and no degree of trying to be "more > welcoming" will change that. It might be or might not be so (just thinking about it is neither productive nor helpful - doing something [e.g. trying new paths in case of mutt] is the way to go). We have devs primarily for stable releases and these minions for unstable releases - KISS. > what might work is surveying the various forks out there, and if one > with a competent and reasonably active+cooperative maintainer is found, > offer him the job with no further strings attached. the first part can > (and probably must) be done by the wider community, the second by the > maintainers. Sure - if I understand you correctly, you mean "first part" from the time-perspective which seems like a "title" for my proposal about introduction of a partly-stable branch. >>> then maybe you should explain what you meant? thinking it through >>> properly? >> >> I tried, but didn't notice anyone from "those who are still around" to >> not care. Therefore I was a bit surprised by your view/feeling. >> > this makes no sense. maybe you again forgot what you said yourself? Well, "care" in the sense, they try (actively) not to give permissions to those who try to improve/fix mutt. > further, this here is a community which is 20 years old and cleary > didn't have significant "modern influences". so what exactly is your > point? I'm afraid I can't agree with the conclusion "clearly didn't have significant ...". From the discussion it seems we both have access to the same sources, but each of us derives from them quite a different result. That means the discussion is pointless unless we have other relevant sources to help us decide. >> In mutts trac there are plenty of patches from people who tried the >> "more agile" variant [...] >> > uh, what? > i see no evidence of a shift in unpaid foss contribution patterns. I'm not sure if it's necessary to see the shift, but it's definitely necessary to be aware of the current state/attitude and to act accordingly. > also, the whole "agile" buzz seems utterly inapplicable to loosely knit > online communities. or approached differently, they *already were* agile > before the corporate world made it a fad. Agile in its original meaning (http://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/agile) applies to the behavior of devs of many (I would say more than half) mutt-sized projects (especially those being so common like mutt) these days. Regards -- Jan Pacner
