From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Date: Sun, 20 Jul 2014 09:33:46 +0200 From: dante To: Fans of the OS Plan 9 from Bell Labs <9fans@9fans.net> In-Reply-To: <1405815147.49188.YahooMailBasic@web184705.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> References: <1405815147.49188.YahooMailBasic@web184705.mail.ne1.yahoo.com> Message-ID: User-Agent: Posteo Webmail Subject: Re: [9fans] Plan9 Sources Repository Topicbox-Message-UUID: 07c424d8-ead9-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025 thanks. On 20.07.2014 02:12, Brian L. Stuart wrote: >> My whole argument goes about the following hypotheses: >> 1. increasing the amount of contributions may not scale in >> the current model. >> 2. submitting trivial contributions is not trivial for the >> contributor. > > Both of these points seem to come from a mental model > that just doesn't apply to Plan 9. In earlier messages, you > used the word team to describe the set of people contributing > to Plan 9. However, in reality, there isn't a Plan 9 team, per > se. Essentially, Plan 9 is a research system. It's a platform > and a vehicle for doing systems research. It is true that it > has been very useful as the basis of products, as infrastructure, > and as a daily-use OS. However, rather than being its raison > d'etre, Plan 9's utility is a tribute to and the acid test of the > research work done on it. After all, I'm hardly going to suggest > that a file system I develop is worthy of study or use if I'm > not willing to put my own data on it. (So yes, my main file > server is running on thetafs, and has been for months.) > > Given that the primary function of Plan 9 is to be a research > system, neither increasing numbers of contributions nor > trivial contributions are to be expected. In fact, it's not > clear they would be particularly desirable. > > The flip side of all this is that because it has been very useful, > many of us use it heavily enough that we'd be loathe to > return to a world where we'd have to do without it. So there > is valid motivation to expand the set of supported hardware, > fix bugs, make it easier to install and use, etc. While, I'm > not in a position to speak for the principals involved, from > my perspective, both 9atom and 9front are laregely so > motivated. I don't think I'm speaking out of turn when I say > that the maintainers of both of those systems would be more > than happy to accept contributions to them. If, in the course > of making such contributions, you reach a point where the > contribution channel could be improved, then contributing > an improved contribution mechanism would be just as welcome, > I suspect. > > In other words, welcome to the Plan 9 community. We'll > be glad to help you however we can. We encourage and > look forward to seeing any contributions you make that > emerge from what captures your interest. > > BLS