From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from us-smtp-1.mimecast.com (us-smtp-1.mimecast.com [207.211.31.120]) by mx.groups.io with SMTP id smtpd.web11.21226.1574326552556505277 for ; Thu, 21 Nov 2019 00:55:52 -0800 Authentication-Results: mx.groups.io; dkim=pass header.i=@redhat.com header.s=mimecast20190719 header.b=QLXVnwED; spf=pass (domain: redhat.com, ip: 207.211.31.120, mailfrom: lersek@redhat.com) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=redhat.com; s=mimecast20190719; t=1574326551; h=from:from:reply-to:subject:subject:date:date:message-id:message-id: to:to:cc:cc:mime-version:mime-version:content-type:content-type: content-transfer-encoding:content-transfer-encoding: in-reply-to:in-reply-to:references:references; bh=SHMbBZUFWFARP74KT7GVmzia50Hq+yaiqs4BAPFu7CE=; b=QLXVnwEDMI9kQ+fRB6IRt3QEMNwbXYeKnuHFVAG7z2+82AbFP70ERI/6A2KzBqWv7qCxyt p0ApMFaHtndF3cH3dTjXoWXa5yGDkpZB6qADgrbFF35vRddnSdoaot3EmcZR/4Es7fbMcV Rgy4l7mC9pz4z5eWkVXXMKctZA3yCdM= Received: from mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (mimecast-mx01.redhat.com [209.132.183.4]) (Using TLS) by relay.mimecast.com with ESMTP id us-mta-141-2bAYH1BpP1yfaMFphouHTA-1; Thu, 21 Nov 2019 03:55:49 -0500 Received: from smtp.corp.redhat.com (int-mx04.intmail.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com [10.5.11.14]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by mimecast-mx01.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 8342FDB61; Thu, 21 Nov 2019 08:55:48 +0000 (UTC) Received: from lacos-laptop-7.usersys.redhat.com (ovpn-116-197.ams2.redhat.com [10.36.116.197]) by smtp.corp.redhat.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 7400D5E26E; Thu, 21 Nov 2019 08:55:47 +0000 (UTC) Subject: Re: [edk2-devel] [edk2-platforms][PATCH 1/8] Platform/RPi: Add model family detection To: devel@edk2.groups.io, pete@akeo.ie, Leif Lindholm Cc: Ard Biesheuvel References: <20191114160740.10072-1-pete@akeo.ie> <20191114160740.10072-2-pete@akeo.ie> <20191118175156.GX7323@bivouac.eciton.net> <99b30bf5-a9c6-62aa-f7e2-7db9c2bc9848@akeo.ie> <20191118180521.GY7323@bivouac.eciton.net> <3e51f090-9391-1c59-5a64-c2927011ccb1@akeo.ie> <6dbfd653-ab36-09f4-2f0d-8a9675ed5fae@akeo.ie> <31318a9e-a7fa-b012-8746-8c703efa8161@akeo.ie> From: "Laszlo Ersek" Message-ID: Date: Thu, 21 Nov 2019 09:55:46 +0100 User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.9.1 MIME-Version: 1.0 In-Reply-To: <31318a9e-a7fa-b012-8746-8c703efa8161@akeo.ie> X-Scanned-By: MIMEDefang 2.79 on 10.5.11.14 X-MC-Unique: 2bAYH1BpP1yfaMFphouHTA-1 X-Mimecast-Spam-Score: 0 Content-Language: en-US Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable On 11/20/19 22:50, Pete Batard wrote: > [...] >=20 > Which is why I am trying to invite them to consider one aspect that I > believe is often overlooked: trying to treat time as the 3d most > valuable resource a project needs to concern itself with (end-user > experience being first and overall code/software quality second), and > applying flexibility to what some might be a bit too eager to treat as > non-negotiable rules as a result of that. Rules should be made to serve > and foster those resources rather than the opposite. Contribution rules are already made to prioritize time and effort -- *maintainer* time and effort. - There are fewer maintainers than contributors. - Maintainers tend to stick around for long, contributors may or may not (it varies). - Maintainers generally take more responsibility for the codebase, as a whole, than contributors do. - In most cases, reading code is more difficult than writing code. All of the above turn maintainership and patch review into a permanent bottleneck at the project level. Unclogging that bottleneck is what project rules prioritize. Nobody doubts that strict contribution rules create bottlenecks on the contributor side. That's the lesser wrong. "Moving fast" leads to regressions. In a halfway mature project, which users have grown to rely on, regressions destroy end-user experience (which you put as first priority). Thanks Laszlo