Re: Add Code of Conduct (issue 575620043 by address@hidden)

[Benkő Pál]

David Kastrup <address@hidden> ezt írta (időpont: 2020. febr. 6., Cs, 14:38):
>
> Benkő Pál <address@hidden> writes:
>
> > Janek Warchoł <address@hidden> ezt írta (időpont: 2020.
> > febr. 6., Cs, 0:32):
> >>
> >> I'll try to speak only on the most pressing points to avoid bloating the
> >> discussion unnecessarily.
> >>
> >> I stopped contributing to LilyPond about 6 years ago. One cause of that
> >> change was that I got a job and suddenly had much less time. But it was not
> >> the only cause; it would have been possible for me to contribute at least a
> >> little. The reason I did not was that participating in the development had
> >> been too emotionally draining to endure. In my experience LilyPond has
> >> (used to have?) huge inertia (disproportionate to the size of the project).
> >> I mean (more or less, please consider this to be an approximation) that
> >> when I tried doing things that didn't clearly align with the views of a
> >> person with most authority (for the last few years David has been this
> >> person) I had felt *unwelcome* and my personal impression was that they
> >> were "blocked". It was very difficult to get some things done.
> >
> > You seem to be impatient.  In late 2011 LilyPond broke my renaissance
> > scores (with a fix that uncovered decade old latent bugs --
> > assumptions that were false since long, though probably true when the
> > code was first written), and to get them right took me a _year_ of
> > issues, reviews, reversions, misunderstandings, messing up the
> > submission process and my breaking other people's scores several times
> > (to get just a glimpse, take a look at issue 2783).  I thought that my
> > patches were obviously trivial bug fixes, but to keep LilyPond
> > operational, I (or rather, we, with David and Keith) had to think
> > about the design, not only particular lines of code.  When my last
> > commit reached master in late 2012, it was quite different (and far
> > better) than when I first submitted it.  and the process taught me
> > that David is arguable and well worth respecting.
>
> Arguable and well worth respecting does not really help with regard to
> the cost in emotional energy contributing has.  If the summary
> impression is "David makes contributing to LilyPond a hair-pulling
> nightmare but...", then for most people reading on after the "but" is
> only worth their trouble if they are in a hair-pulling nightmare already
> and need to get out of it.

that year also taught me that difficulties in contributing to LilyPond
stem not from people but from the complexity of the problem, and we
can't expect contributors to see all those complexities.
I broke other people's score with the best intentions, and when they
complained, they did it most courteously by providing a Minimal
Example, which, at first sight, looked to me contortions made on
purpose to tease me.  they used LilyPond for notations I never dreamed
of, but to them those LilyPond features are much more important than
faking a Petrucci print.