There are now 13 issues with the "intro issue" label. I would be interested in any comments on how people feel about the calibration of these.
I have to say that after looking through a large fraction of the open issue list (titles), I basically agree with Stefan's assessment in the other thread that the truly low-hanging fruit gets dealt with pretty quickly. In part this is because we have developed a reflexive response of saying "want to submit a pull request?" when such an issue is submitted -- which usually does elicit a PR from the submitter or someone else in fairly short order. On Fri, May 8, 2015 at 6:41 AM, Tamas Papp <[email protected]> wrote: > I am a Julia newbie, currently diving into the internals so that I can > contribute later. Many design features of Julia are novel, and in flux, > which makes it harder to contibute. Even when an issue seems simple, I > am always concerned that there are ramifications I don't yet > understand. Identifying issues which don't require such a deep > understanding of Julia would be great. > > So I would find Tim's suggested interpretation of the "newbie" label > practical and useful. > > Best, > > Tamas > > On Fri, May 08 2015, Tim Holy <[email protected]> wrote: > > > While I agree that "easy" is not always easy to define, I also think > that there > > is real merit in flagging issues that should not require a deep dive into > > internals. For many first-time contributors, just learning git and > GitHub is > > quite a barrier in itself (it was for me). A one-line fix---like adding a > > missing method---is the perfect warmup exercise. To a potential > contributor, > > s/he presumably has better access to "what am I good at?" than to "what > issues > > will not require three days of work even by someone with expertise in > Julia's > > innards?" > > > > --Tim > > > > On Friday, May 08, 2015 10:33:48 AM Mike Innes wrote: > >> Part of the issue is figuring out what "Newbie" means. New to > programming? > >> Experienced in programming, but new to Julia? Experienced in Julia, but > new > >> to Base? New to open source? Arguably all of these are valid targets, > but > >> mixing them together ends up not being that helpful since people still > have > >> to sort through them. > >> > >> I agree with what Tomas has said about writing packages. I can > definitely > >> understand people wanting to contribute to Base, but if you just want to > >> get some code out there and/or get a taste of the process contributing > to > >> packages will be much quicker and easier. > >> > >> The great thing about Julia's early stage is that (a) it's really easy > to > >> find holes in functionality and (b) if you fill those holes, chance are > >> you'll have "the package" for that functionality, and people are > actually > >> going to use it. On top of that, you're much more likely to be > interested > >> in the work. That's a really great opportunity IMO. > >> > >> It's easy enough to pick something you're interested in and, depending > on > >> your level of confidence, start from scratch, port it from another > >> language, experiment, whatever. As one option, the web stack is > >> particularly ripe for development right now. (Which is a polite way of > >> saying that there isn't much of one.) > >> > >> On 8 May 2015 at 07:03, Tomas Lycken <[email protected]> wrote: > >> > I just want to put some emphasis on what Scott hinted at: if you want > to > >> > contribute to Julia, start with figuring out what *you* know a little > >> > about. > >> > > >> > Sometimes there's code in base that does some of those things, but > not all > >> > of them, and/or not as well as you know how to. > >> > > >> > Sometimes there's not a place in base for your problem domain, but > I've > >> > found that contributing to a package (or building a new one) is just > as > >> > good a way to get started writing some Julia code. And chances are > pretty > >> > high that after a while you stumble upon something in base that needs > >> > improvement for your package development to be as easy as possible - > >> > voila! > >> > We've found someplace in base for you to contribute :) > >> > > >> > Bottom line is, it's usually pretty easy to write Julia code as long > as > >> > you know what the code should do - the hard part is finding something > that > >> > you know how to do (and where to put the code that does it). > >> > > >> > // T > >
