|
From: | Dmitry Gutov |
Subject: | Re: New Package for NonGNU-ELPA: clojure-ts-mode |
Date: | Sun, 27 Aug 2023 00:27:19 +0300 |
User-agent: | Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:102.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/102.13.0 |
On 26/08/2023 17:31, Stefan Kangas wrote:
Dmitry Gutov <dmitry@gutov.dev> writes:Perhaps the maintainers of Emacs should make more effort to increase the benefits of including packages in Emacs,What would you propose?as well as make it more frictionless and user-friendly in the sense that many younger programmers are accustomed to.Fully agreed. We are still looking for volunteers to work on getting us onto a forge, for example. Last time we checked, Sourcehut was unfortunately not up to scratch: https://todo.sr.ht/~emacs/emacs/1
If it's not, it's not. *shrug*But if no existing solution agrees with us, that seems to say something about us too, right?
Perhaps things have changed, though? I guess it wouldn't hurt if someone looked into it.
I'm not sure SourceHut is much of an improvement in the way of development experience, but at this point any change would likely be a positive.
I have to note, though, that their bug tracking solution is either non-existent or entirely merged into "mailing lists". Which, no matter how well we explain them (and we should try, time permitting) will remain alien to a significant fraction of our users.
These are the two main areas in Emacs I would try to address, if I had more time and authority:
- Talking to our users (better, more familiar access to bug tracking first and foremost, but anything that makes mailing lists friendlier would also be a win; GitHub has "Discussions" which are pretty nice, but that seems entirely out of reach).
- The initial experience for new users (standard bindings; reworked tutorial; reworking of the menu; first install wizards with suggested settings presets; etc). I don't have anything new to add here. It's a difficult, very poorly defined endeavor without a lot of consensus, so even little progress in that area is great.
But the first point in particular (easier user communication) would also be important in attracting more third-party developers to contribute code to Emacs. Not that it's necessary for all code: I think ELPA is perfectly fine for most.
Everything else is secondary.
Rather than just "better explaining" it.We should be able to work on several things at the same time.
Sure. On the subject of explaining things, I also hope we'll be able to reach the point where the leadership doesn't act dismissive toward the broader development community and we can finally agree that "What those people think" definitely is "a crucial issue" in many situations.
[Prev in Thread] | Current Thread | [Next in Thread] |