Re: Comments on proposing NEW queue improvement (Re: Current NEW review process saps developer motivation
On Sat, 2022-08-27 at 09:50 +0200, Gard Spreemann wrote:
>
> contributing work. In some sense, contributing to Debian becomes
> mostly
> about waiting. (Sure, there is something to be said about extremely
> short, fragmented attention spans being unhealthy – but some
> contributions are naturally short and easy, and we certainly don't
> want
> to drive those away.)
That's why I still hope ftp team to recruit more people. This is
a very direct and constructive way to speed up everything.
More volunteers = higher bandwidth.
Recruiting more people doesn't seem to have a serious disadvantage.
In my fuzzy memory, the last discussion on NEW queue improvement
involves the disadvantages by allowing SOVERSION bump to directly
pass the NEW queue. I'm not going to trace back, because I know
this will not be implemented unless someone proposes a GR.
> > If one's enthusiasm on working on some package is eventually
> > worn out after a break, then try to think of the following
> > question:
> >
> > Is it really necessary to introduce XXX to Debian?
>
> I hope we won't try to define what "necessary" means, or have it
> become
> a criterion for inclusion :-)
>
> > Must I do this to have fun?
>
> I don't think Debian contribution has ever been a necessary condition
> for fun. That's an incredibly high bar. If we were only to attract
> people whose only idea of fun was contributing to Debian, I think
> we'd
> become a very unhealthy project (and one severely lacking in
> contributors).
For newcomers, a long wait wears out their interest of course. I'm
not sure what would be the reason for a potential newcomer to reach
us if they do not find contributing this project "fun/interesting",
or "worthwhile/useful".
For people who chose to stay in this community, there must be a
reason behind them. Because I believe no body can contribute
to a volunteer project without payment / fame / enjoyment.
Without such a high bar, the member list will be much more volatile.
> > Strong motivations such as "I use this package, seriously" are not
> > likely to wear out very easily through time. Packages maintained
> > with a strong motivation are better cared among all packages in our
> > archive.
>
> I humbly disagree. Even from my own point of view, I may well be very
> motivated to package something I use seriously all the time,
> seriously. But then I see its dependency chain of 10 unpackaged
> items,
> start thinking about the probability that they'll *all* clear the NEW
> queue, and how long that would take, and I give up. And then there's
> the
> problem of attracting smaller contributions, as mentioned above: I
> really believe that people get put off from putting in 30 minutes of
> work for a nice MR on Salsa if they can't expect their work to hit
> the
> archives for months and months (suppose for example they contributed
> to
> a package whose SONAME is being bumped).
I agree with your disagreement but I keep my opinion. My track record
involves maintaining loads of reverse dependency libraries.
I've already gone
through all kinds of pains from the NEW queue and eventually learned
to take a break immediately after uploading something to new.
That said, if someone presents a GR proposal I'll join. In Debian,
it is not that easy to push something forward unless it hurts everyone.
Our NEW queue mechanism has been there for decades, and people are
already accustomed to it (including me). From multiple times of
discussion in the past, I don't see the NEW queue problem hurting
too many people. If nothing gets changed in the NEW queue mechanism,
people may gradually get used to it, following the "do not fix it
if it ain't wrong" rule. The voice will gradually vanish.
This is surely unhealthy. But as an individual developer I don't find
many feasible ways to push things forward unless someone figure out
a reason that as many people feel hurt about it as possible.
> > Why not calm down, and try to do something else as interesting
> > as Debian development when waiting for the NEW queue?
>
> Sure. That's what I do. My list of joyful and less joyful things to
> fill
> my days with is enormous. **BUT: I worry for the project if our
> solution
> to the problem at hand is "maybe just contribute less to Debian".**
> Is
> that really what we want?
>
I forecast this thread will eventually end up with
"calm down and take a break" solution again.
Reply to: