On Tue, Aug 27, 2013 at 2:14 PM, wrote:
> On 09:54 am, _...@lvh.io wrote:
>
>> IIUC, Tom does most of his contributing through Github. That probably
>> means
>> that it's a well-supported process that has most of the kinks ironed out:
>> after all, if Tom hasn't caught them, I would guess a new c
On 09:54 am, _...@lvh.io wrote:
IIUC, Tom does most of his contributing through Github. That probably
means
that it's a well-supported process that has most of the kinks ironed
out:
after all, if Tom hasn't caught them, I would guess a new contributor
probably wouldn't either :-)
Or it means
IIUC, Tom does most of his contributing through Github. That probably means
that it's a well-supported process that has most of the kinks ironed out:
after all, if Tom hasn't caught them, I would guess a new contributor
probably wouldn't either :-)
cheers
lvh
__
On 26/08/2013, Terry Jones wrote:
> This doesn't prove anything, but I think the first plot at
> http://jakevdp.github.io/blog/2012/09/20/why-python-is-the-last/ is quite
> provocative.
Terry,
I don't think the problem is "too few contributors".
A big problem is that there are too few reviewers
This doesn't prove anything, but I think the first plot at
http://jakevdp.github.io/blog/2012/09/20/why-python-is-the-last/ is quite
provocative.
Semi-related: I made a tiny optimization to jQuery a couple of months ago
as a completely unknown first-time contributor. The time from doing the git
cl
