Re: Why are so many great packages not trying to get included in GNU Emacs? WAS: Re: Making Emacs more friendly to newcomers

[Konstantin Kharlamov]

On Sun, 2020-06-21 at 05:35 +0300, Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > From: Konstantin Kharlamov <hi-angel@yandex.ru>
> > Cc: rekado@elephly.net, emacs-devel@gnu.org, stefan@marxist.se, 
> >     joaotavora@gmail.com, dgutov@yandex.ru
> > Date: Sun, 21 Jun 2020 01:25:15 +0300
> > 
> > So, I recalculated by looking at date of the last commit of those "500" in
> > GCC,
> > and used that date on Clang. I made sure to sort out other corporate mails
> > too.
> > Command I used is:
> > 
> >     git log --since="Jun 8 21:34:46" --format="%ae" | grep -vP
> > "@\S*(redhat|arm|suse|google|gnu|adacore|alibaba|intel|ibm|apple|linaro|huaw
> > ei|c
> > odesourcery|golang|sony|amd|chromium|nvidia|loongson|accesssoftek|ubisoft|mi
> > cros
> > oft|fb|energize|comstyle|nextsilicon|quicinc|azul|gentoo|graphcore|gdcprojec
> > t|si
> > five|imagelabs|xilinx|sap|sas|sigmatechnology|sonarsource|ericsson|lowrisc|h
> > ight
> > ec-rt|polymagelabs)\.(org|com|de|cz|cn|ai|se)" | sort -u | wc -l
> > 
> > So, now GCC still gets 15, while for Clang this number gets increased to 89.
> 
> This metric is irrelevant.  Basically, you removed everyone who was a
> prominent developer, so it's little wonder that you are left with a
> small number.  Using such arbitrary criteria, one can "prove" anything
> for any project.
> 
> Once again, the long history and the active development of GCC over
> those long years are a clear evidence that your criterion is
> completely off the mark.

I thought I brought counter-arguments to both of your points in my previous 
email. Anyway, as Stefan mentioned, it is getting offtopic, so maybe let's not 
continue discussing GCC and Clang.