| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Community faultsCommunity faultsPosted Sep 26, 2007 9:23 UTC (Wed) by nix (subscriber, #2304)In reply to: Community faults by man_ls Parent article: My Fabulous Geek Career (O'ReillyNet)
Quite so. There are a number of projects which I maintain significant patches for, but which I'll never submit because I've seen other people submit patches to those projects and they are likely get flamed to hell and back for having the temerity to do any such thing, or at the very least snapped at: and it doesn't take anything near as harsh as flaming to make it not worth my time to contribute to such projects at all. It's not just people from cultures where politeness and formality is critical (e.g. Japan) that get turned off by this, although it's probably even worse for them.
Maybe I should stick all my quilt trees online: it's not worth forking all these projects for half a dozen patches each, but that would be a useful sort of halfway house for projects like that...
(Log in to post comments)
Community faults Posted Sep 26, 2007 14:59 UTC (Wed) by gravious (guest, #7662) [Link] Why don't you send them to a distro package maintainer and let them push them upstream? Or why not use Ubuntu's Launchpad to nudge them in the right direction by setting up projects or filing bugs with patches attached? I can code but I've never made patches larger than one or two lines per app and I think it's a shame that if you have some hacks that could be valuable for all that you'd keep them to yourself. Just a suggestion - you probably know all this judging from your LWN comments so ignore me if I'm being dumb.
Community faults Posted Sep 26, 2007 15:40 UTC (Wed) by nix (subscriber, #2304) [Link] That's what I tend to do, but I have to get around to it. :)
(Also I've never really thought of using package maintainers for distros I don't use as upstream-intermediaries; it seems a sort of unjustified imposition on their time. But it's a good idea anyway and I may well do as you suggest.)
|
|
||||||||||||