Dan, thanks for the honest critique. Keno, Stephan, Jeff, thanks for the quick and specific replies. Tim, thanks for the very explicit instructions on how newbies such as myself can contribute. I also think julia-users is very welcoming, which helps me be bullish on the language.
On Monday, December 29, 2014 9:11:55 PM UTC-8, Dan Luu wrote: > > Hi Jeff, > > > That's a lot of claims, so let me just respond to one, that my post > "implies ... that we don't understand our own code". > > Where I've been vague and imply something it's because I don't like > calling people out by name. > > I literally stated the opposite in my post, saying that the Julia core > team can "hold all of the code in their collective heads". > > I'm guessing the objection is to the line "code that even the core > developers can't figure out because it's too obscure", but that refers > to the vague anecdote in the previous paragraph. The plural here is a > side effect of being vague, not an implication that you can't figure > it out your own code. > > If it helps clear the air, the specifics are that when I ask Stefan > how something works the most common response I get is that I should > ask you or the mailing list since it's your code and he doesn't really > understand it. He could probably figure it out, but it's enough of a > non-trivial effort that he always forwards me to someone else. You > might object that I never actually emailed you, but that's because > I've seen what happened Leah emailed you, with plenty of reminder > emails, when she was working on her thesis and trying to figure out > things that would help her finish her thesis. Most emails didn't get a > response, even with a reminder or two, and I figured I'd get the same > treatment since I don't even know you. > > I understand that you must be incredibly busy, between doing your own > thesis and also being the most prolific contributor to Julia. But > perhaps you can see why, in this case, I might not expect my questions > to be "received with gratitude". > > There are some easily verifiable claims in my post that got > "pushback". That plotting bug? Probably because I'm using master, > which wasn't true and could have been checked by anyone with a release > build handy. That thing about build stats? Probably grabbing the wrong > numbers, which wasn't true, and could be easily spot checked by using > the script pointed in my linked post. > > In the past, I've talked to someone about the build being broken and > gotten the response that it worked for him, and when I pointed out > that Travis had been broken for half a day I got some response about > how Travis often has spurious fails. The bug eventually got fixed, a > few days later, but in the meantime the build was broken and there was > also a comment about how people shouldn't expect the build on master > to not be broken. I'm being vague again because I don't see calling > people out as being very productive, but if you prefer I can dig > through old chat logs the dredge up the specifics. > > Now, you say that responses to bug reports aren't responses to blog > posts. That's true, but perhaps you can see why I might not feel that > it's a great use of time to file every bug I run across when the > responses I've gotten outside of github bug reports have been what > they are. > > Sorry if I've caused any offense with my vagueness and implications > that can be read from my vagueness. > > > Best, > Dan > > > On Mon, Dec 29, 2014 at 10:39 PM, Tim Holy <[email protected] > <javascript:>> wrote: > > For anyone who wants to help with the test coverage issue, I just posted > some > > instructions here: > > https://github.com/JuliaLang/julia/issues/9493 > > > > --Tim > > > > On Monday, December 29, 2014 06:55:37 PM Ravi Mohan wrote: > >> Fwiw the correct engineering response here seems to be to acknowledge > the > >> subset of Dan's criticisms that are valid/reasonable, fix those, and > get > >> back to work. Criticising Dan's motives etc isn't a productive path > (imo) > >> If there are low hanging fruit fixes on such a successful project,(the > >> build/test thing certainly seems to be one) that is a *good* thing. Yes > the > >> HN crowd can be a bit rough (I am plinkplonk on HN, fwiw) , and often > >> unreasonable, but hey anyone running an open source project can't > afford to > >> get disturbed by weird discussions on HN. > >> > >> All projects have bugs, and if someone has an uncanny knack for > surfacing > >> heisenbugs, that is a good thing, irrespective of communication style. > >> > >> My 2 cents (I am just tinkering with Julia and don't use it anger yet, > but > >> after some discussion with Viral (who is my neighbor) am considering > >> jumping in - Julia is a brilliant project). As a prospective > contributor to > >> Julia, I am encouraged by Stefan's approach to this) > >> > >> regards, > >> Ravi > > >
