sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: Public SourceMage Discussion List
List archive
Re: [SM-Discuss] Popularity, visibility, and level of involvement
- From: Ismael Luceno <ismael.luceno AT gmail.com>
- To: Jeremy Blosser <jblosser-smgl AT firinn.org>
- Cc: sm-discuss AT lists.ibiblio.org
- Subject: Re: [SM-Discuss] Popularity, visibility, and level of involvement
- Date: Thu, 7 Jan 2016 20:18:15 -0200
On Wed, Oct 07, 2015 at 02:32:52PM -0500, Jeremy Blosser wrote:
> On Oct 07, Ismael Luceno [ismael.luceno AT gmail.com] wrote:
> > On Sat, 3 Oct 2015 04:18:29 -0500
> > Jeremy Blosser <jblosser-smgl AT firinn.org> wrote:
> > > On Sep 29, Ismael Luceno [ismael.luceno AT gmail.com] wrote:
> > > > When it comes to visibility, IMO, where we have our repositories is
> > > > completely irrelevant,
> > >
> > > It absolutely is not irrelevant in the current environment of
> > > cloud-everything. We are seeing the advent of an entire generation
> > > that considers "git<cloud> hosted" as the minimum for a project worth
> > > their time.
> >
> > And it's absolutely not worth recruiting those wimps. Seriously. We
> > could even move to CVS and it would have almost no impact.
>
> Thinking they are the wimps is a pretty major oversight. Whether we like it
> or not, quite a lot of the state of the art is out there these days, and
> there's an entire generation now that won't know any time before that.
First, we're an OS, developers are necessarily users, that's why our
processes don't matter much to get people involved.
Second, IMO, you're describing a recipe for trouble, and right now we're
most vulnerable; lets at least acknowledge those aren't the most
brilliant developers, we're in need for a little bit of talent, not just
numbers.
-
Re: [SM-Discuss] Popularity, visibility, and level of involvement,
Ismael Luceno, 01/07/2016
- <Possible follow-up(s)>
- Re: [SM-Discuss] Popularity, visibility, and level of involvement, Ismael Luceno, 01/07/2016
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.