3 ms·

I've always found it emblematic of the basic problems of this community that they choose to a communicate through mailing lists with an online interface that lo

I've always found it emblematic of the basic problems of this community that they choose to a communicate through mailing lists with an online interface that looks crap no matter how you try to view it. Like, if they had dumped the text into an html <body> tag it would have re-flowed gracefully, but somehow they broke that too, and have not managed to do anything about it in decades.

globular-toast 6y ago
You can't just "cast" it as html and let it reflow. Email has significant whitespace and writers use it a lot. Do you have examples of projects that have used a "better" method of communication that have achieved what GNU, Linux or any of the BSDs have achieved?
Anthony-G 6y ago
The OP, Zack Weinberg helpfully published his analysis on his own web page¹ and the formatting (different typeface for headings, flowing paragraph text, hypertext links, bullet points) made the analysis much more readable. I think email is fine as the communication medium for software projects – particularly for projects that have been around for as long as Autotools†. For me, the biggest downside is that not all mailing lists use GNU mailman or other listserv software that provide archiving of list posts. Having a searchable archive of discussions is invaluable. † though I was surprised to see a number of contributors top-posting; that practice was universally discouraged on Internet mailing lists until the number of new members using MS Outlook overwhelmed members who followed the established “netiquette” 1. https://www.owlfolio.org/development/autoconf-swot/ https://www.owlfolio.org/development/autoconf-swot/
- mangecoeur 6y ago
  So we agree that the online presentation is not good - I have no issue with email particularly, i have a problem with the email archives. More specifically, the fact that no one cares about the usability of the archive or online presentation is proof that they don't care about the impression they make external people. They can hardly complain about the lack of new contributors if they make no effort to be accessible to them.
mangecoeur 6y ago
Self replying because this seems to have tickled a few people the wrong way: I'm specifically complaining about the online presentation of the mail/archive (or lack thereof), not the use of mail per-se. Simply, you can't complain about the lack of new contributors if you make no effort towards appeal and usability.

globular-toast 6y ago

You can't just "cast" it as html and let it reflow. Email has significant whitespace and writers use it a lot. Do you have examples of projects that have used a "better" method of communication that have achieved what GNU, Linux or any of the BSDs have achieved?

Anthony-G 6y ago

The OP, Zack Weinberg helpfully published his analysis on his own web page¹ and the formatting (different typeface for headings, flowing paragraph text, hypertext links, bullet points) made the analysis much more readable. I think email is fine as the communication medium for software projects – particularly for projects that have been around for as long as Autotools†. For me, the biggest downside is that not all mailing lists use GNU mailman or other listserv software that provide archiving of list posts. Having a searchable archive of discussions is invaluable. † though I was surprised to see a number of contributors top-posting; that practice was universally discouraged on Internet mailing lists until the number of new members using MS Outlook overwhelmed members who followed the established “netiquette” 1. https://www.owlfolio.org/development/autoconf-swot/ https://www.owlfolio.org/development/autoconf-swot/

mangecoeur 6y ago
So we agree that the online presentation is not good - I have no issue with email particularly, i have a problem with the email archives. More specifically, the fact that no one cares about the usability of the archive or online presentation is proof that they don't care about the impression they make external people. They can hardly complain about the lack of new contributors if they make no effort to be accessible to them.

mangecoeur 6y ago

Self replying because this seems to have tickled a few people the wrong way: I'm specifically complaining about the online presentation of the mail/archive (or lack thereof), not the use of mail per-se. Simply, you can't complain about the lack of new contributors if you make no effort towards appeal and usability.