I'm speaking very much as a passenger in this community, and I've had the privilege of meeting just a few of you people, but that may be no handicap.
It's a worthwhile debate to have, but this is very much an edge case. Rich has kindly and wisely reduced his own bum-print in the ecosystem so much that the majority of what other languages include is found in higher velocity libraries. For small changes to core (and core libs) as Andy said, contribs are often incorporated whole after feedback. This change by Zach is by these standards enormous, so it's not going to follow that route. Again, for small or cosmetic changes, credit is sufficient feedback for most (otherwise do something else), but in this case there is a question to be answered about the manner by which Zach's hand-wrought (and iterated by request) code was effectively redone unilaterally. I agree with Luc and Colin on the link between the success of Clojure and Rich's insistence on doing things his way. We are all here because this is the case and Clojure the language is as clean and simple as Rich can keep it. However, this example proves that Rich is not omniscient (though we do all love him dearly). It took months of work by Zach to turn a belief into a provable case to make fundamental changes to the implementation of small data structures. We all need to foster such dedication to improving the language many of us have bet our careers on. This episode is not likely to encourage the next girl to do that work. Alex has put ZT front and centre for credit for the update, and made it the centrepiece of the new release, and that's great. But I think some comments from someone inside the temple might also be of use. Who knows, maybe this prompts a rethink of how the pipeline works in the future.. That perhaps would be a suitable response to Zach's contribution to both language and community. -- Fergal Byrne, Brenter IT Author, Real Machine Intelligence with Clortex and NuPIC https://leanpub.com/realsmartmachines Speaking on Clortex and HTM/CLA at euroClojure Krakow, June 2014: http://euroclojure.com/2014/ and at LambdaJam Chicago, July 2014: http://www.lambdajam.com http://inbits.com - Better Living through Thoughtful Technology http://ie.linkedin.com/in/fergbyrne/ - https://github.com/fergalbyrne e:fergalbyrnedub...@gmail.com t:+353 83 4214179 Join the quest for Machine Intelligence at http://numenta.org Formerly of Adnet edi...@adnet.ie http://www.adnet.ie On Saturday 18 Jul 2015 at 17:17, Ben Wolfson <wolf...@gmail.com>, wrote: On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 6:21 AM, Bozhidar Batsov <bozhi...@batsov.com> wrote: On 18 July 2015 at 14:13, Andrey Antukh <n...@niwi.nz> wrote: Hi! I have some, maybe controversial, questions... A little bit of context: https://twitter.com/aphyr/status/621806683908542464 Why this is like a normal approach for managing third party contributions to clojure core? This kind of things the only discourages the contributions. Maybe I don't have more context about this concrete case, but seems is not a unique. And in general, I have the perception that the clojure development process is a little bit opaque... Many people feel this way, but ultimately Clojure is Rich's project and I guess Cognitect's to some extent. If they don't want to run it like other more open & contribution-friendly OSS projects this is obviously their right. This is a line of response I don't really understand; sure, it's within Rich's/Cognitect's rights to run the project as they please, but I don't think any of the aggrieved parties is claiming that Rich did something he had no *right* to do. One can still suggest that the way the project's run (or the way these specific issues were handled) is unwise or shabby or otherwise capable of improvement. No one has to take the suggestion, but it might be better if they did. -- Ben Wolfson "Human kind has used its intelligence to vary the flavour of drinks, which may be sweet, aromatic, fermented or spirit-based. ... Family and social life also offer numerous other occasions to consume drinks for pleasure." [Larousse, "Drink" entry] -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout. -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To post to this group, send email to clojure@googlegroups.com Note that posts from new members are moderated - please be patient with your first post. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/clojure?hl=en --- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Clojure" group. To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to clojure+unsubscr...@googlegroups.com. For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.
