On Mon, Nov 21, 2022 at 2:06 PM Werner LEMBERG <w...@gnu.org> wrote: > The thing is: Something might happen if I'm not available, for > whatever reasons. It definitely *is* a high maintenance cost if a > single developer is responsible... >
But that's true of any one feature: I build you a nice template library to do <whatever> in <whatever situation> and you find a bug while I'm <on vacation>. That can always happen, we know this, we cope with it. How's the TeX/texinfo build any different? > > And to what Wols said: I agree completely, it should be _all_ about > > the users, coding is an act of service, not self-gratification. The > > joy comes from making (other) humans happy, not compilers... > > I disagree, it is *not* all about the users. There must be a balance > between what the developers want to do or can do, and what the users > expect. Promising stuff to the user, which later on fails due to the > lack of developer resources, is bad. > Forgive me Werner, but it appears to me your own closing point is actually precisely about the users, isn't it? If I may paraphrase what I hear you say: "The users are being disserviced (is that a word?) thereby this is bad". I agree, of course. This IS bad. The users are being provided with an unsatisfactory experience, and that is undesirable. And it seems to me you're concerned in the same way as I am: our role here is in service of a community that engraves music sheets. When we stop these people, impede their progress, make their planning invalid (possibly because we're not delivering to what we promised), we are behaving poorly to them. I share that concern, and I think it's a very ethically sound concern to have, it's an important thing to worry about, I'd say. I'd characterize it as a user-focused concern, no? L -- Luca Fascione
