Adrian,

I am trying to make suggestions to make Ragel more accessible to
people new to it. There is no need to shoot the messenger. If I am
saying it, then some other people are probably thinking it.

Re: ""please move the project hosting somewhere else because it would
be more convenient for me."" -- that is not what I said, nor how I
said it, nor does it capture my intent. You can see that, I hope, in
my original private email to you.

I'm just trying to offer suggestions that will help. Yes, they might
help me, but they will also increase participation. Github and
Bitbucket reduce barriers to collaboration. The stone age did not end
because we ran out of stone. These tools are simply better than
mailing lists for particular use cases. For the other use cases you
still can use the mailing list! Ragel would benefit from these
features: wiki pages, bug tracking, easy forking, code comments, and
more.

I respect your personal decision to disagree -- I could be wrong! --
however, I think the community is likely missing out, so I do not
think it should "just" be a matter of "personal preference". It should
be a question of what serves the community the best. The beauty of
this is that it is not hard. It is not either/or. You can try Github
without forcing people to use it and see what happens.

--

In my experience reading a diff is quick -- even a large one. So, I
still have a hard time seeing how scanning the diff is all that time
consuming. Boring, perhaps, but not really that time intensive. I
spent an hour or two reading and copy-editing the manual, so I didn't
think it was wrong to ask for you to review the diff. Maybe it would
take 10 minutes?

Re: "extraneous whitespace modifications" -- it is second nature to me
to use word wrapping as I edit. Since I read over the entire manual I
figured it was much faster to do the word wrapping and editing at the
same time. Does it really matter that I cleaned up the whitespace and
fixed typos in the one patch rather than two? In either case you will
need to review the docs, right?

To be direct, is this more about making the documentation better -- or
more about having it done the way you prefer it? We could continue
down the path of "whose time is more valuable" but that doesn't make
the docs better.

--

I said "reality distortion field because I said "here is a bug" and
your response was "don't do that" without admitting that it was a bug.
Look, I found a work-around, so it wasn't a big deal. And I don't
expect it to be fixed right away --- or ever. But it is a bug, best I
can tell. My goal in sharing it publicly was to confirm or deny it --
and share it on the record for others.

--

I also said "reality distortion field" because I'm not sure if the
experts here can relate / remember what it was like to learn Ragel  in
the first place. It is difficult. It is easy (and reasonable, perhaps)
to point a newbie to the manual. We should be willing to ask ourselves
if there is a better way.

Finding good, simple examples to learn Ragel is still hard. When I ask
to see if there are example and get pointed to the manual that I've
already read multiple times, that doesn't advance the conversation. I
would suggest asking a question: "have you looked at section X?" works
better than "the answer is in section X". The former suggests an
open-mindedness -- a willingness to admit that the manual and
documentation can be improved -- and invites the community to improve
it together.

If I thought Ragel was "just too hard for mortals" and was beyond
explanation -- which, unfortunately does come across in some write ups
-- or if I thought Ragel was "peachy just as it is" and already had
all the documentation needed, then I would not be writing this email.

Anyhow, as I've said before, I will try to share code examples and
problems that I find along the way. That said, I will have less
motivation to share if the community tone is not friendly. That
matters a lot to me.

-David

On Thu, Aug 30, 2012 at 3:38 PM, Adrian Thurston <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> Well possibly it should be prohibited, but there are all kind of other bad
> things that can be done with ragel and the answer is usually "don't do the
> bad thing". Consequently, I don't spend too much time working on those kinds
> of issues. If you would like to work on it you're welcome to.
>
>> I'm going roughly 0 for 4 on the mailing list. I'm a new user trying
>> to get feedback here -- and there seems to be a sort of reality
>> distortion field going on. I have not had this experience on other
>> open source projects.
>
> 1. Don't submit patches with extraneous whitespace modifications and expect
> the maintainer to sort it out.
>
> 2. Don't make your opening suggestion "please move the project hosting
> somewhere else because it would be more convenient for me."
>
> -Adrian

_______________________________________________
ragel-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://www.complang.org/mailman/listinfo/ragel-users

Reply via email to