Re: we now have "lilypond" organization on GitHub

[David Kastrup]

Graham Percival <address@hidden> writes:

> On Sun, Sep 22, 2013 at 05:30:04PM +0200, Janek Warchoł wrote:
>> 2013/9/22 Phil Holmes <address@hidden>:
>> > IMHO this is solving a problem that doesn't exist.  Using LilyDev (possibly
>> > in a Virtual Machine) provides git and git-cl.
>> >
>> > How hard is that?
>> 
>> Hard.
>
> Good.
> (aside: note that my email about gerritt was aimed at moving
> lilypond development back to savannah, rather than spread across
> 3-4 companies/platforms)
>
> The experience from the Grand Documentation Project is that only
> 25% of new doc contributors ended up being a net benefit.  Having
> an up-front hurdle, provided that it's well-explained, is a useful
> way to weed out people who are likely to fall into the remaining
> 75%.

But indeed a valid other strategy would be to have the 75% have little
to no upfront cost.  That's one of the reasons we have a Contributor's
Guide.

Of course the strategies are not exclusive.

> Granted, some of the 25% might also be turned away.  So it's a
> question of the sum of values from all E(contributor | uses git-cl) %
> noting that the value from a contributor can be positive % or negative
> vs.  sum of values from all E(contributor)
>
> I'm confident that the sum of the first is greater than the
> second.

It's too early in the day for me to do conditional probabilities...

-- 
David Kastrup