An interesting, different perspective from an end user. Thanks. On Sunday, June 5, 2016 at 6:40:50 PM UTC+2, Rex van der Spuy wrote: > > Hi Everyone! > > I'm not sure that open-source contributions are always a good idea. > I want more simplicity, less syntax and fewer features :) > That's why I'm using Elm. > > Open-source projects invariably go the opposite way: contributors keep on > endlessly "adding more stuff". > They tend to end up as a steaming witches brew of badly patched together > excellent ideas and a bloated mess of pain. > That's why I'm not using React, Angular or JavaScript (and wish I didn't > have to use Node or Webpack). > > I'm pretty doubtful that if Elm were truly open source that such a > radical, well-considered, and superbly correct decision as getting rid of > signals would have ever happened. > > But, I'm just a dumb-user! > I'm only interested in using Elm for making cool stuff - I'm not > interested in or capable of contributing to its source code. > However, to my great delight I found that 0.17 addressed the four big > headaches I had in 0.16: > Signals (confusing!), Boilerplate (too much!) drag-and-drop (tricky!) and > random numbers (near impossible?) > > How did that happen? > Because I and many others inundated Elm's discussion lists (here and at > Reddit) with endless questions on these subjects. > And, someone was obviously listening closely, because all those issues > were magically addressed in 0.17 without my having to even having to glance > at Elm's source code. > Thank you, Elm! > > I also noticed that there were many extremely well-considered, > convincingly argued and excellent suggestions from the community on how to > solve these problems. > But, significantly, the way they were solved in 0.17 was better than all > of them. > > What would have happened if those excellent - but ultimately less perfect > - decisions made it into 0.17? > .... JavaScript? > > So if development on Elm needs to be slow and reject direct collaboration > in order for it to be good, then I truly hope that future development is as > slow and single-mined as as possible :) > > PS: > > (And I just want to once again thank all of you who've helped me to lean > Elm with your brilliant answers to all my newbie questions over these past > 6 months - Peter! Daniel! Magnus! Max! and others! - you guys rock! I > deeply appreciate it.) > > On Thursday, June 2, 2016 at 3:04:53 AM UTC-4, Peter Damoc wrote: >> >> On Thu, Jun 2, 2016 at 2:34 AM, Evan <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Use ports! >>> >>> Support for "web platform" things will expand as quickly is as >>> manageable with all the other things that need to happen. >>> >> >> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/elm-discuss/oQz5_HvsdcQ/BFN_rLIDAgAJ >> >> Evan, >> >> Here is what I see: >> >> Fred attempted to expand the support for the "web platform". >> He did all the work and produced a package that follows, to the best of >> his abilities, the latest guidelines. >> He even went as far as to gift this package to elm-lang.org. >> He opened an issue and there are a number of people who saw that issue >> and expressed interest in having this solved (even if they did it only by >> giving the issue a thumbs-up) . >> >> There was NO official feedback on that issue in the past 7 days since it >> was published. >> No comment, no label, no feedback either way. >> And now you say "Use ports!" like that doesn't even exist. >> >> I realize that there are other important things that need to happen but >> maybe you should take some time and create some Community Guidelines that >> would include a detailed checklist for contributing. >> >> Make it easier for people like Fred who are actively trying to help to >> actually help. >> Make it easier for people who see people like Fred to become like Fred >> (active contributors). >> >> I realize that there are technical concerns and maybe legal concerns but >> all these can be solved by adopting a clear and solid contribution process. >> >> You said last year: >> On Tue, Jan 6, 2015 at 4:16 PM, Evan Czaplicki <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> I tend to be more conservative and risk averse on technical stuff, so I >>> tend to be a control freak. >>> >> >> https://groups.google.com/d/msg/elm-discuss/np3BO9X5rEc/jG3AIiU2zYEJ >> >> That's perfectly fine and one of the reasons Elm evolves so nicely BUT it >> is also one of the reasons Elm develops way slower than it needs to. >> >> Jeff pointed last year to ZeroMQ community as a source of inspiration. I >> would LOVE for Elm community to follow a similar contract. >> >> On a side note, Pieter Hinjens recently distilled all his previous work >> on community building into a free book. Here is the chapter on the C4 >> ( Collective Code Construction Contract ) >> <https://hintjens.gitbooks.io/social-architecture/content/chapter4.html> >> it documents the reasons for why things are the way they are. >> >> So, in closing, help us help you make Elm even greater than it already >> is. :) >> >> >
-- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Elm Discuss" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to [email protected]. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
