[ANNOUNCE] Git Merge Contributors Summit, April 8th, Paris

[ANNOUNCE] Git Merge Contributors Summit, April 8th, Paris

[Jeff King]

I wanted to make one more announcement about this, since a few more
details have been posted at:

  http://git-merge.com/

since my last announcement. Specifically, I wanted to call attention to
the contributor's summit on the 8th. Basically, there will be a space
that can hold up to 50 people, it's open only to git (and JGit and
libgit2) devs, and there isn't a planned agenda. So I want to:

  1. Encourage developers to come. You might meet some folks in person
     you've worked with online. And you can see how beautiful we all
     are.

  2. Get people thinking about what they would like to talk about.  In
     past GitTogethers, it's been a mix of people with prepared things
     to talk about, group discussions of areas, and general kibitzing.
     We can be spontaneous on the day of the event, but if you have a
     topic you want to bring up, you may want to give it some thought
     beforehand.

If you are a git dev and want to come, please RSVP to Chris Kelly
<amateurhuman@github.com> who is organizing the event. If you would like
to come, but finances make it hard (either for travel, or for the
conference fee), please talk to me off-list, and we may be able to help.

If you have questions, please feel free to ask me, and I'll try to get
answers from the GitHub folks who are organizing the event.

-Peff

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git Merge Contributors Summit, April 8th, Paris

[Junio C Hamano]

Jeff King <peff@peff.net> writes:

> I wanted to make one more announcement about this, since a few more
> details have been posted at:
>
>   http://git-merge.com/
>
> since my last announcement. Specifically, I wanted to call attention to
> the contributor's summit on the 8th. Basically, there will be a space
> that can hold up to 50 people, it's open only to git (and JGit and
> libgit2) devs, and there isn't a planned agenda.
> ...
> If you have questions, please feel free to ask me, and I'll try to get
> answers from the GitHub folks who are organizing the event.

I'm likely to come to the Summit, but I wonder what the timetable
for the 8th look like.  Is the "Get Together" designed to overlap
the Summit time-wise?  Is the Together there so that those not
attending the Summit can kill time?  Do those attending the Summit
partcipate in the Together, too?

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git Merge Contributors Summit, April 8th, Paris

[Stefan Beller]

On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 2:09 PM, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
>
>   2. Get people thinking about what they would like to talk about.  In
>      past GitTogethers, it's been a mix of people with prepared things
>      to talk about, group discussions of areas, and general kibitzing.
>      We can be spontaneous on the day of the event, but if you have a
>      topic you want to bring up, you may want to give it some thought
>      beforehand.

I am planning to discuss the next git version protocol(s?) which can handle lots
of refs with anybody interested.

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git Merge Contributors Summit, April 8th, Paris

[Sebastian Schuberth]

On 25.02.2015 01:47, Stefan Beller wrote:

>>    2. Get people thinking about what they would like to talk about.  In
>>       past GitTogethers, it's been a mix of people with prepared things
>>       to talk about, group discussions of areas, and general kibitzing.
>>       We can be spontaneous on the day of the event, but if you have a
>>       topic you want to bring up, you may want to give it some thought
>>       beforehand.
>
> I am planning to discuss the next git version protocol(s?) which can handle lots
> of refs with anybody interested.

Sounds like this could be interesting for Gerrit users with a lot of 
refs/changes, so I'll make sure to have a chat with you if I manage to 
come to the summit.

-- 
Sebastian Schuberth

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git Merge Contributors Summit, April 8th, Paris

[Christian Couder]

Hi,

On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 11:09 PM, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
> I wanted to make one more announcement about this, since a few more
> details have been posted at:
>
>   http://git-merge.com/
>
> since my last announcement. Specifically, I wanted to call attention to
> the contributor's summit on the 8th. Basically, there will be a space
> that can hold up to 50 people, it's open only to git (and JGit and
> libgit2) devs, and there isn't a planned agenda. So I want to:
>
>   1. Encourage developers to come. You might meet some folks in person
>      you've worked with online. And you can see how beautiful we all
>      are.
>
>   2. Get people thinking about what they would like to talk about.  In
>      past GitTogethers, it's been a mix of people with prepared things
>      to talk about, group discussions of areas, and general kibitzing.
>      We can be spontaneous on the day of the event, but if you have a
>      topic you want to bring up, you may want to give it some thought
>      beforehand.
>
> If you are a git dev and want to come, please RSVP to Chris Kelly
> <amateurhuman@github.com> who is organizing the event. If you would like
> to come, but finances make it hard (either for travel, or for the
> conference fee), please talk to me off-list, and we may be able to help.

I'd like the Git project to set up a more organized way to pay back
the travel costs and the conference fee to the developers who come.
For example the Git project could say that it will at least pay back:

- all the travel costs to the 5 most important Git developers who come and ask,
- half the travel costs to the 5 next most important Git developers
who come and ask,
- all the conference fee to the 15 most important Git developers who
come and ask,

I think it could help developers decide to come, and it looks like
enough funding could be available, thanks to GitHub and the GSoC
money. What do you think?

Apart from that it's also possible to find ways to accommodate some
developers for free, if they don't mind crashing in someone's spare
room.

So please don't hesitate to ask if you would like to come.

Thanks,
Christian.

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git Merge Contributors Summit, April 8th, Paris

[Junio C Hamano]

Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com> writes:

> On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 11:09 PM, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
>> I wanted to make one more announcement about this, since a few more
>> details have been posted at:
>>
>>   http://git-merge.com/
>>
>> since my last announcement. Specifically, I wanted to call attention to
>> the contributor's summit on the 8th. Basically, there will be a space
>> that can hold up to 50 people, it's open only to git (and JGit and
>> libgit2) devs, and there isn't a planned agenda. So I want to:
>>
>>   1. Encourage developers to come. You might meet some folks in person
>> ...
>>   2. Get people thinking about what they would like to talk about.  In
>> ...
>> If you are a git dev and want to come, please RSVP to Chris Kelly
>> <amateurhuman@github.com> who is organizing the event. If you would like
>> to come, but finances make it hard (either for travel, or for the
>> conference fee), please talk to me off-list, and we may be able to help.
>
> I'd like the Git project to set up a more organized way to pay back
> the travel costs and the conference fee to the developers who come.
> For example the Git project could say that it will at least pay back:
>
> - all the travel costs to the 5 most important Git developers who come and ask,
> - half the travel costs to the 5 next most important Git developers
> who come and ask,
> - all the conference fee to the 15 most important Git developers who
> come and ask,
>
> I think it could help developers decide to come, and it looks like
> enough funding could be available, thanks to GitHub and the GSoC
> money. What do you think?

I personally perfer things to be kept informal---it would keep
things simpler for everybody.  You do not have to wonder what you
should do when you think you are among the five most important
people and you also know your employer will pay for the conference
if you asked, for example.

It feels to me that the suggestion Peff gave in his announce to ask
privately for case-by-case arrangement strikes the balance much
better.

> Apart from that it's also possible to find ways to accommodate some
> developers for free, if they don't mind crashing in someone's spare
> room.
>
> So please don't hesitate to ask if you would like to come.

These five lines, by not explicitly saying something like "the first
2 people who ask can crash in Christian's spare bedroom", is doing
exactly the same thing as Peff did by saying "please talk to me
off-list", it seems to me at least.  Both keep things informal and
simple, and both arrange things on case-by-case basis as needed.

And I think that is better than setting a seemingly hard rules
upfront, and causing more problems unnecessarily (e.g. who decides
who are the 5 most important, for example?).

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git Merge Contributors Summit, April 8th, Paris

[Michael J Gruber]

Junio C Hamano venit, vidit, dixit 05.03.2015 23:24:
> Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com> writes:
> 
>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 11:09 PM, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
>>> I wanted to make one more announcement about this, since a few more
>>> details have been posted at:
>>>
>>>   http://git-merge.com/
>>>
>>> since my last announcement. Specifically, I wanted to call attention to
>>> the contributor's summit on the 8th. Basically, there will be a space
>>> that can hold up to 50 people, it's open only to git (and JGit and
>>> libgit2) devs, and there isn't a planned agenda. So I want to:
>>>
>>>   1. Encourage developers to come. You might meet some folks in person
>>> ...
>>>   2. Get people thinking about what they would like to talk about.  In
>>> ...
>>> If you are a git dev and want to come, please RSVP to Chris Kelly
>>> <amateurhuman@github.com> who is organizing the event. If you would like
>>> to come, but finances make it hard (either for travel, or for the
>>> conference fee), please talk to me off-list, and we may be able to help.
>>
>> I'd like the Git project to set up a more organized way to pay back
>> the travel costs and the conference fee to the developers who come.
>> For example the Git project could say that it will at least pay back:
>>
>> - all the travel costs to the 5 most important Git developers who come and ask,
>> - half the travel costs to the 5 next most important Git developers
>> who come and ask,
>> - all the conference fee to the 15 most important Git developers who
>> come and ask,
>>
>> I think it could help developers decide to come, and it looks like
>> enough funding could be available, thanks to GitHub and the GSoC
>> money. What do you think?
> 
> I personally perfer things to be kept informal---it would keep
> things simpler for everybody.  You do not have to wonder what you
> should do when you think you are among the five most important
> people and you also know your employer will pay for the conference
> if you asked, for example.
> 
> It feels to me that the suggestion Peff gave in his announce to ask
> privately for case-by-case arrangement strikes the balance much
> better.
> 
>> Apart from that it's also possible to find ways to accommodate some
>> developers for free, if they don't mind crashing in someone's spare
>> room.
>>
>> So please don't hesitate to ask if you would like to come.
> 
> These five lines, by not explicitly saying something like "the first
> 2 people who ask can crash in Christian's spare bedroom", is doing
> exactly the same thing as Peff did by saying "please talk to me
> off-list", it seems to me at least.  Both keep things informal and
> simple, and both arrange things on case-by-case basis as needed.
> 
> And I think that is better than setting a seemingly hard rules
> upfront, and causing more problems unnecessarily (e.g. who decides
> who are the 5 most important, for example?).

Oh yes, that would be an interesting metric to define...

OTOH I can see where Christian's question is coming from:
Who is even supposed to ask for support? Not just as in "who is a
developer", but also "what are finance hardships":

At scientific conferences which I'm going to, there is often "support
for those who need it", and that typically means participants from "less
fortunate countries" (to avoid the usual world-counting term). Everyone
else is expected to be covered by their academic employer - and if not,
it's not even okay to ask the organisers. I guess that's what some of us
are having in mind.

That still leaves the question:
Is there any space left in Christian's spare bedroom? :)

Michael

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git Merge Contributors Summit, April 8th, Paris

[Christian Couder]

On Thu, Mar 5, 2015 at 11:24 PM, Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> wrote:
> Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com> writes:
>
>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 11:09 PM, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
>>> I wanted to make one more announcement about this, since a few more
>>> details have been posted at:
>>>
>>>   http://git-merge.com/
>>>
>>> since my last announcement. Specifically, I wanted to call attention to
>>> the contributor's summit on the 8th. Basically, there will be a space
>>> that can hold up to 50 people, it's open only to git (and JGit and
>>> libgit2) devs, and there isn't a planned agenda. So I want to:
>>>
>>>   1. Encourage developers to come. You might meet some folks in person
>>> ...
>>>   2. Get people thinking about what they would like to talk about.  In
>>> ...
>>> If you are a git dev and want to come, please RSVP to Chris Kelly
>>> <amateurhuman@github.com> who is organizing the event. If you would like
>>> to come, but finances make it hard (either for travel, or for the
>>> conference fee), please talk to me off-list, and we may be able to help.
>>
>> I'd like the Git project to set up a more organized way to pay back
>> the travel costs and the conference fee to the developers who come.
>> For example the Git project could say that it will at least pay back:
>>
>> - all the travel costs to the 5 most important Git developers who come and ask,
>> - half the travel costs to the 5 next most important Git developers
>> who come and ask,
>> - all the conference fee to the 15 most important Git developers who
>> come and ask,
>>
>> I think it could help developers decide to come, and it looks like
>> enough funding could be available, thanks to GitHub and the GSoC
>> money. What do you think?
>
> I personally perfer things to be kept informal---it would keep
> things simpler for everybody.  You do not have to wonder what you
> should do when you think you are among the five most important
> people and you also know your employer will pay for the conference
> if you asked, for example.
>
> It feels to me that the suggestion Peff gave in his announce to ask
> privately for case-by-case arrangement strikes the balance much
> better.

My opinion is that it is good to give developers who could come an
idea of what the Git project should at least be able and willing to
fund, because most developers might have no idea about that.

For example many developers who contributed say less than 50 patches
to Git may think that they have no chance of being payed back anything
which might not be true at all. And by the way to make that clear, it
would be nice if the Git project could say for example every few weeks
how many people have asked for something.

I don't think there is a perfect way to do this kind of thing, but I
think being more transparent and upfront while still taking care of
privacy issues and leaving some room for discussion, can only help.

>> Apart from that it's also possible to find ways to accommodate some
>> developers for free, if they don't mind crashing in someone's spare
>> room.
>>
>> So please don't hesitate to ask if you would like to come.
>
> These five lines, by not explicitly saying something like "the first
> 2 people who ask can crash in Christian's spare bedroom", is doing
> exactly the same thing as Peff did by saying "please talk to me
> off-list", it seems to me at least.  Both keep things informal and
> simple, and both arrange things on case-by-case basis as needed.

I must say that it is quite different, because in case of my spare
bedroom I am the only one who decides according to my own priorities.
For example if too many people ask to be accommodated and one of them
helped me personally in the past, I will be much more likely to chose
him regardless of his importance for the Git project.

> And I think that is better than setting a seemingly hard rules
> upfront, and causing more problems unnecessarily (e.g. who decides
> who are the 5 most important, for example?).

First the rules are not so hardly set, especially because they say "at
least this amount", so in case of doubt there is room for paying back
more to more people than initially planned.

And anyway in the "case-by-case as needed basis", you still have the
problem to decide how much to pay back each one, in case people ask
for more than what is available. In this case it could be seen as very
unfair that rules are defined or negociated on the fly. (Though I
agree that in the past it went very well, but then I think it can only
improve things to have some rules defined at the beginning.)

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git Merge Contributors Summit, April 8th, Paris

[Christian Couder]

On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 11:52 AM, Michael J Gruber
<git@drmicha.warpmail.net> wrote:
> Junio C Hamano venit, vidit, dixit 05.03.2015 23:24:
>> Christian Couder <christian.couder@gmail.com> writes:
>>
>>>
>>> I'd like the Git project to set up a more organized way to pay back
>>> the travel costs and the conference fee to the developers who come.
>>> For example the Git project could say that it will at least pay back:
>>>
>>> - all the travel costs to the 5 most important Git developers who come and ask,
>>> - half the travel costs to the 5 next most important Git developers
>>> who come and ask,
>>> - all the conference fee to the 15 most important Git developers who
>>> come and ask,
>>>
>>> I think it could help developers decide to come, and it looks like
>>> enough funding could be available, thanks to GitHub and the GSoC
>>> money. What do you think?
>>
>> I personally perfer things to be kept informal---it would keep
>> things simpler for everybody.  You do not have to wonder what you
>> should do when you think you are among the five most important
>> people and you also know your employer will pay for the conference
>> if you asked, for example.
>>
>> It feels to me that the suggestion Peff gave in his announce to ask
>> privately for case-by-case arrangement strikes the balance much
>> better.
>>
>>> Apart from that it's also possible to find ways to accommodate some
>>> developers for free, if they don't mind crashing in someone's spare
>>> room.
>>>
>>> So please don't hesitate to ask if you would like to come.
>>
>> These five lines, by not explicitly saying something like "the first
>> 2 people who ask can crash in Christian's spare bedroom", is doing
>> exactly the same thing as Peff did by saying "please talk to me
>> off-list", it seems to me at least.  Both keep things informal and
>> simple, and both arrange things on case-by-case basis as needed.
>>
>> And I think that is better than setting a seemingly hard rules
>> upfront, and causing more problems unnecessarily (e.g. who decides
>> who are the 5 most important, for example?).
>
> Oh yes, that would be an interesting metric to define...
>
> OTOH I can see where Christian's question is coming from:
> Who is even supposed to ask for support? Not just as in "who is a
> developer", but also "what are finance hardships":
>
> At scientific conferences which I'm going to, there is often "support
> for those who need it", and that typically means participants from "less
> fortunate countries" (to avoid the usual world-counting term). Everyone
> else is expected to be covered by their academic employer - and if not,
> it's not even okay to ask the organisers. I guess that's what some of us
> are having in mind.

I had more in mind the people who mentored GSoC students (and this way
helped the Git project get some money) and the 200 or so developers
who contributed between 10 and 50 patches, though I agree it could
also be useful for others too. As far as I know very few people have
asked for funding and it would be sad that people don't come because
they think they would not be payed back the costs when in fact they
would.

> That still leaves the question:
> Is there any space left in Christian's spare bedroom? :)

Yes, no one as asked yet, so I shoud be able to accommodate you if you want :-)

See you soon,
Christian.

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git Merge Contributors Summit, April 8th, Paris

[Jeff King]

On Fri, Mar 06, 2015 at 11:52:06AM +0100, Michael J Gruber wrote:

> OTOH I can see where Christian's question is coming from:
> Who is even supposed to ask for support? Not just as in "who is a
> developer", but also "what are finance hardships":

In my mind, the minimum line for hardship is basically "you would be
paying out of pocket". Many of us can get our employers to send us to
conferences, but I imagine there are many people who cannot (or do not
want to ask their employers).

-Peff

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git Merge Contributors Summit, April 8th, Paris

[Jeff King]

On Fri, Mar 06, 2015 at 01:06:15PM +0100, Christian Couder wrote:

> And anyway in the "case-by-case as needed basis", you still have the
> problem to decide how much to pay back each one, in case people ask
> for more than what is available. In this case it could be seen as very
> unfair that rules are defined or negociated on the fly. (Though I
> agree that in the past it went very well, but then I think it can only
> improve things to have some rules defined at the beginning.)

I agree it would be nice to have some well-defined rules so that
everything is fair. But I do not know what those rules should be.

You have said things like "5 most important" in your email, but I do not
see any metric for defining that. Is it "git shortlog"? I am not sure
that is the best metric (try generating your own list and comparing it
with shortlog). Also, is it "shortlog" over all time, or "shortlog
--since=1.year.ago", or some other time period.

I had hoped by inviting people to express their need, that the
invitation would be equally open to everyone, and we could then get an
idea of the scope of need.

By the way, nobody has contacted me asking for travel money at this
point.

-Peff

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git Merge Contributors Summit, April 8th, Paris

[Junio C Hamano]

On Fri, Mar 6, 2015 at 4:55 AM, Christian Couder
<christian.couder@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I had more in mind the people who mentored GSoC students (and this way
> helped the Git project get some money)...

Just on this part, because I want to avoid giving a wrong impression
to discourage
potential mentors to participate and help GSoC.

The Git project does not require mentors to donate their mentorship
stipend to the
project. IIRC The pool started because the stipend was a small amount of money
($500 or so) that still counted as income to whoever is getting, and
all mentors found
it not worth their time having to deal with the hassle individually.
That is how our
association with Software Freedom Conservancy started: have a legal entity hold
such money as a non-profit.

If a mentor wants to keep his mentorship stipend, the Git project (the
legal entity)
is perfectly OK with that.

Of course, I am hoping that all the mentors are doing GSoC not for money but out
of love of our software and our community, but the above sounded as if you are
saying that the past mentors were robbed by the project and are
entitled to crawl
their money back. I just wanted to make sure that mentors will not be
robbed (and
the past ones weren't robbed) against their will.

Bashing freelancers (was: [ANNOUNCE] Git Merge Contributors Summit, April 8th, Paris)

[David Kastrup]

Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:

> Of course, I am hoping that all the mentors are doing GSoC not for
> money but out of love of our software and our community,

At some point of time I think it may be worth reevaluating the toxic
atmosphere against freelancers doing Git development.

There is nothing wrong with not having a fixed employment paying the
rent.  And there is nothing to be gained by going out of one's way
vilifying those who cannot afford to work for free.

Good work is worth good money.  Suggesting that people who are not able
to work for free are morally inferior is not conducive for a cooperative
work atmosphere.

I still have patches sitting in my repository that I could not bring
myself to finish for contribution after the shameful treatment of my
months of git-blame work where I was credited in passing with a wrong
name in one "What's cooking", and after I pointed out that not even my
name was correct, removed altogether.  All that in connection with
public shaming that I wanted to point out to end users that this work
required financing if it were to continue.

-- 
David Kastrup

Re: Bashing freelancers

[Junio C Hamano]

David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:

> Good work is worth good money. Suggesting that people who are not able
> to work for free are morally inferior is not conducive for a cooperative
> work atmosphere.

Yes, but I do not think anybody did any such thing.

Re: Bashing freelancers

[David Kastrup]

Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:

> David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:
>
>> Good work is worth good money. Suggesting that people who are not able
>> to work for free are morally inferior is not conducive for a cooperative
>> work atmosphere.
>
> Yes, but I do not think anybody did any such thing.

"Of course, I am hoping that all the mentors are doing GSoC not for
money but out of love of our software and our community,"

Huh.

-- 
David Kastrup

Re: Bashing freelancers

[Junio C Hamano]

David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:

> Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:
>
>> David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:
>>
>>> Good work is worth good money. Suggesting that people who are not able
>>> to work for free are morally inferior is not conducive for a cooperative
>>> work atmosphere.
>>
>> Yes, but I do not think anybody did any such thing.
>
> "Of course, I am hoping that all the mentors are doing GSoC not for
> money but out of love of our software and our community,"
>
> Huh.

I did not intend any moral judgement in that statement, but after
re-reading it, I would say that "not for money" would have been
better phrased as "not only for money".

Let me clarify.

There _could_ be a mentor who hates Git the software and Git the
community, who wants to mentor students only for the mentorship
stipend.  I do not want to see such mentors.  I would imagine that
such a person surely can find something else that is more enjoyable
and do the mentoring there for money, if competent enough to mentor
others.  And that would be good for everybody.

Re: Bashing freelancers

[David Kastrup]

Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:

> David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:
>
>> Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:
>>
>>> David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:
>>>
>>>> Good work is worth good money. Suggesting that people who are not able
>>>> to work for free are morally inferior is not conducive for a cooperative
>>>> work atmosphere.
>>>
>>> Yes, but I do not think anybody did any such thing.
>>
>> "Of course, I am hoping that all the mentors are doing GSoC not for
>> money but out of love of our software and our community,"
>>
>> Huh.
>
> I did not intend any moral judgement in that statement, but after
> re-reading it, I would say that "not for money" would have been
> better phrased as "not only for money".
>
> Let me clarify.
>
> There _could_ be a mentor who hates Git the software and Git the
> community, who wants to mentor students only for the mentorship
> stipend.

Uh, mentors don't rise from beneath the Earth.  They are project
members.  Do you want to suggest that you suspect those contributors to
have worked on Git, which they hate with a vengeance, only so that they
could cash in on GSoC?  You know the kind of sum we are talking about
here, right?  Pocketing that makes sense only if you feel _indifferent_
about anything but money and are not planning on investing significant
amount of work.  It's too little to do something you actually hate.

> I do not want to see such mentors.  I would imagine that such a person
> surely can find something else that is more enjoyable and do the
> mentoring there for money, if competent enough to mentor others.  And
> that would be good for everybody.

I think Google would prefer a mentor who takes the money and does the
job to someone who hands the money on to some more generic Git account
out of love for the project and community and does not find the time for
actually mentoring his student, but feels sort of ok about it because he
did not in the end take the money.

Someone who hates Git will at least have a solid idea about where Git is
most in need of improvement...

No, I'm not volunteering.  I am merely sick of the income-bashing and
consider it not doing a useful job for Git or other free software.
Particularly not in connection with a program like Google Summer of Code
which is _designed_ to let money make a difference.

-- 
David Kastrup

Re: Bashing freelancers

[David Kastrup]

Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:

> David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:
>
>> Junio C Hamano <gitster@pobox.com> writes:
>>
>>> David Kastrup <dak@gnu.org> writes:
>>>
>>>> Good work is worth good money. Suggesting that people who are not able
>>>> to work for free are morally inferior is not conducive for a cooperative
>>>> work atmosphere.
>>>
>>> Yes, but I do not think anybody did any such thing.
>>
>> "Of course, I am hoping that all the mentors are doing GSoC not for
>> money but out of love of our software and our community,"
>>
>> Huh.
>
> I did not intend any moral judgement in that statement, but after
> re-reading it, I would say that "not for money" would have been
> better phrased as "not only for money".

Shrug.  "love of our software and our community" was not sufficient in
the thread started at
<http://permalink.gmane.org/gmane.comp.version-control.git/255385> to
make anybody do a one-character change spelled out explicitly even after
the user, presumably a "community" member, begged again.  Presumably a
case of "Somebody else's problem".

The reality is that developers work mostly for their own motivations,
what Linus Torvalds describes as "scratching your own itch".  And not
everybody is in the situation where he is able to scratch his own itch.

Sometimes there are good scratchers whose main itch is that everybody is
of the opinion they are so excellent at scratching people's itches that
they have the moral obligation to not do anything else.

Like eating.  Or sleeping.  Or having a life.

The non-glorious part of maintaining a flea circus where you can say
"jump" and marvel at inhuman feats of strength is feeding time.  You
can't just hope to shake down some passing dog whenever it is
performance time: even if that works, some of your actors may be too
starved to perform well.

Well, a flea circus is probably a bad analogy when talking about
scratching one's own itches.  But it's easy to state that one wants
people to work for love when oneself is getting paid for it.

-- 

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git Merge Contributors Summit, April 8th, Paris

[Thomas Ferris Nicolaisen]

On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 11:09 PM, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
> I wanted to make one more announcement about this, since a few more
> details have been posted at:
>
>   http://git-merge.com/
>
> since my last announcement. Specifically, I wanted to call attention to
> the contributor's summit on the 8th. Basically, there will be a space
> that can hold up to 50 people, it's open only to git (and JGit and
> libgit2) devs, and there isn't a planned agenda. So I want to:
>
>   1. Encourage developers to come. You might meet some folks in person
>      you've worked with online. And you can see how beautiful we all
>      are.
>
>   2. Get people thinking about what they would like to talk about.  In
>      past GitTogethers, it's been a mix of people with prepared things
>      to talk about, group discussions of areas, and general kibitzing.
>      We can be spontaneous on the day of the event, but if you have a
>      topic you want to bring up, you may want to give it some thought
>      beforehand.
>
> If you are a git dev and want to come, please RSVP to Chris Kelly
> <amateurhuman@github.com> who is organizing the event. If you would like
> to come, but finances make it hard (either for travel, or for the
> conference fee), please talk to me off-list, and we may be able to help.
>
> If you have questions, please feel free to ask me, and I'll try to get
> answers from the GitHub folks who are organizing the event.
>

I'll be arriving around 11 am on the 8th, if anyone wants to record
something for the GitMinutes podcast [1]. Send me an email directly,
or just walk up to me at the conference and say hi! I'll hopefully be
hanging around the contributor's summit area with some microphones,
but I've been unable to get any feedback from GitHub about whether
this is OK, so.. I guess we'll just wing it when I get there.

[1] http://www.gitminutes.com/

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git Merge Contributors Summit, April 8th, Paris

[Christian Couder]

On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 12:48 AM, Thomas Ferris Nicolaisen
<tfnico@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 11:09 PM, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
>> I wanted to make one more announcement about this, since a few more
>> details have been posted at:
>>
>>   http://git-merge.com/
>>
>> since my last announcement. Specifically, I wanted to call attention to
>> the contributor's summit on the 8th. Basically, there will be a space
>> that can hold up to 50 people, it's open only to git (and JGit and
>> libgit2) devs, and there isn't a planned agenda. So I want to:
>>
>>   1. Encourage developers to come. You might meet some folks in person
>>      you've worked with online. And you can see how beautiful we all
>>      are.
>>
>>   2. Get people thinking about what they would like to talk about.  In
>>      past GitTogethers, it's been a mix of people with prepared things
>>      to talk about, group discussions of areas, and general kibitzing.
>>      We can be spontaneous on the day of the event, but if you have a
>>      topic you want to bring up, you may want to give it some thought
>>      beforehand.
>>
>> If you are a git dev and want to come, please RSVP to Chris Kelly
>> <amateurhuman@github.com> who is organizing the event. If you would like
>> to come, but finances make it hard (either for travel, or for the
>> conference fee), please talk to me off-list, and we may be able to help.
>>
>> If you have questions, please feel free to ask me, and I'll try to get
>> answers from the GitHub folks who are organizing the event.
>>
>
> I'll be arriving around 11 am on the 8th, if anyone wants to record
> something for the GitMinutes podcast [1]. Send me an email directly,
> or just walk up to me at the conference and say hi! I'll hopefully be
> hanging around the contributor's summit area with some microphones,
> but I've been unable to get any feedback from GitHub about whether
> this is OK, so.. I guess we'll just wing it when I get there.
>
> [1] http://www.gitminutes.com/

By the way as far as I know nothing has been planned for the
Contributors Summit on the 8th.
Maybe we could list some topics that we could discuss.

I will probably write very short articles about some of the
discussions for the next Git Rev News edition, but I would be happy if
other people would like to contribute some. Please tell me and Thomas
if you are interested.

Also I am not sure if something is planned for the evening of the 8th
or not. If nothing is planned maybe we could discuss having dinner
together or something.

And if someone needs help or arrives in Paris early or leaves late and
is interested in meeting up, feel free to contact me.

Best,
Christian.

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git Merge Contributors Summit, April 8th, Paris

[Stefan Beller]

I am interested in discussing the git pack protocol v2.
(I have been thinking about that for a while now,
though not sharing a lot on the mailing list, so feedback is
somewhat limited. :( )


On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 12:08 PM, Christian Couder
<christian.couder@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 12:48 AM, Thomas Ferris Nicolaisen
> <tfnico@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 11:09 PM, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
>>> I wanted to make one more announcement about this, since a few more
>>> details have been posted at:
>>>
>>>   http://git-merge.com/
>>>
>>> since my last announcement. Specifically, I wanted to call attention to
>>> the contributor's summit on the 8th. Basically, there will be a space
>>> that can hold up to 50 people, it's open only to git (and JGit and
>>> libgit2) devs, and there isn't a planned agenda. So I want to:
>>>
>>>   1. Encourage developers to come. You might meet some folks in person
>>>      you've worked with online. And you can see how beautiful we all
>>>      are.
>>>
>>>   2. Get people thinking about what they would like to talk about.  In
>>>      past GitTogethers, it's been a mix of people with prepared things
>>>      to talk about, group discussions of areas, and general kibitzing.
>>>      We can be spontaneous on the day of the event, but if you have a
>>>      topic you want to bring up, you may want to give it some thought
>>>      beforehand.
>>>
>>> If you are a git dev and want to come, please RSVP to Chris Kelly
>>> <amateurhuman@github.com> who is organizing the event. If you would like
>>> to come, but finances make it hard (either for travel, or for the
>>> conference fee), please talk to me off-list, and we may be able to help.
>>>
>>> If you have questions, please feel free to ask me, and I'll try to get
>>> answers from the GitHub folks who are organizing the event.
>>>
>>
>> I'll be arriving around 11 am on the 8th, if anyone wants to record
>> something for the GitMinutes podcast [1]. Send me an email directly,
>> or just walk up to me at the conference and say hi! I'll hopefully be
>> hanging around the contributor's summit area with some microphones,
>> but I've been unable to get any feedback from GitHub about whether
>> this is OK, so.. I guess we'll just wing it when I get there.
>>
>> [1] http://www.gitminutes.com/
>
> By the way as far as I know nothing has been planned for the
> Contributors Summit on the 8th.
> Maybe we could list some topics that we could discuss.
>
> I will probably write very short articles about some of the
> discussions for the next Git Rev News edition, but I would be happy if
> other people would like to contribute some. Please tell me and Thomas
> if you are interested.
>
> Also I am not sure if something is planned for the evening of the 8th
> or not. If nothing is planned maybe we could discuss having dinner
> together or something.
>
> And if someone needs help or arrives in Paris early or leaves late and
> is interested in meeting up, feel free to contact me.
>
> Best,
> Christian.
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git Merge Contributors Summit, April 8th, Paris

[Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason]

On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 10:28 PM, Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> wrote:
> I am interested in discussing the git pack protocol v2.
> (I have been thinking about that for a while now,
> though not sharing a lot on the mailing list, so feedback is
> somewhat limited. :( )

I'm keen to talk about the new protocol and other scaling issues I
raised in the recent "Git Scaling: What factors most affect Git
performance for a large repo?" thread. Although from my testing the
main problems in performance are the local pack-refs file &
reachability checks, mostly not the protocol itself.

At the risk of using this list + the venue for soliciting I also want
to mention that my employer is willing to pay someone on a contract
basis to work on Git scalability issues, given the right person etc.
etc. So if someone's at the conference is interested in that I'd be
keen to talk to you.

> On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 12:08 PM, Christian Couder
> <christian.couder@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 12:48 AM, Thomas Ferris Nicolaisen
>> <tfnico@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Tue, Feb 24, 2015 at 11:09 PM, Jeff King <peff@peff.net> wrote:
>>>> I wanted to make one more announcement about this, since a few more
>>>> details have been posted at:
>>>>
>>>>   http://git-merge.com/
>>>>
>>>> since my last announcement. Specifically, I wanted to call attention to
>>>> the contributor's summit on the 8th. Basically, there will be a space
>>>> that can hold up to 50 people, it's open only to git (and JGit and
>>>> libgit2) devs, and there isn't a planned agenda. So I want to:
>>>>
>>>>   1. Encourage developers to come. You might meet some folks in person
>>>>      you've worked with online. And you can see how beautiful we all
>>>>      are.
>>>>
>>>>   2. Get people thinking about what they would like to talk about.  In
>>>>      past GitTogethers, it's been a mix of people with prepared things
>>>>      to talk about, group discussions of areas, and general kibitzing.
>>>>      We can be spontaneous on the day of the event, but if you have a
>>>>      topic you want to bring up, you may want to give it some thought
>>>>      beforehand.
>>>>
>>>> If you are a git dev and want to come, please RSVP to Chris Kelly
>>>> <amateurhuman@github.com> who is organizing the event. If you would like
>>>> to come, but finances make it hard (either for travel, or for the
>>>> conference fee), please talk to me off-list, and we may be able to help.
>>>>
>>>> If you have questions, please feel free to ask me, and I'll try to get
>>>> answers from the GitHub folks who are organizing the event.
>>>>
>>>
>>> I'll be arriving around 11 am on the 8th, if anyone wants to record
>>> something for the GitMinutes podcast [1]. Send me an email directly,
>>> or just walk up to me at the conference and say hi! I'll hopefully be
>>> hanging around the contributor's summit area with some microphones,
>>> but I've been unable to get any feedback from GitHub about whether
>>> this is OK, so.. I guess we'll just wing it when I get there.
>>>
>>> [1] http://www.gitminutes.com/
>>
>> By the way as far as I know nothing has been planned for the
>> Contributors Summit on the 8th.
>> Maybe we could list some topics that we could discuss.
>>
>> I will probably write very short articles about some of the
>> discussions for the next Git Rev News edition, but I would be happy if
>> other people would like to contribute some. Please tell me and Thomas
>> if you are interested.
>>
>> Also I am not sure if something is planned for the evening of the 8th
>> or not. If nothing is planned maybe we could discuss having dinner
>> together or something.
>>
>> And if someone needs help or arrives in Paris early or leaves late and
>> is interested in meeting up, feel free to contact me.
>>
>> Best,
>> Christian.
>> --
>> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
>> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
>> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
> --
> To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in
> the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
> More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git Merge Contributors Summit, April 8th, Paris

[Stefan Beller]

On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 6:55 AM, Ævar Arnfjörð Bjarmason
<avarab@gmail.com> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 6, 2015 at 10:28 PM, Stefan Beller <sbeller@google.com> wrote:
>> I am interested in discussing the git pack protocol v2.
>> (I have been thinking about that for a while now,
>> though not sharing a lot on the mailing list, so feedback is
>> somewhat limited. :( )
>
> I'm keen to talk about the new protocol and other scaling issues I
> raised in the recent "Git Scaling: What factors most affect Git
> performance for a large repo?" thread. Although from my testing the
> main problems in performance are the local pack-refs file &
> reachability checks, mostly not the protocol itself.

Yes, the new protocol might not be the most pressing part for scaling up
the repository, but I feel like it's the most challenging and fun part for me
when talking about scaling issues. ;)
e.g. if you fetch git.git (and you're up to date!), the git protocol
already eats
130kB of bandwidth, so in case you're on your mobile expensive data plan
you'll hate the inefficiency, it was measured with
    git ls-remote git://github.com/gitster/git |wc -c
    132048
or as a gerrit developer:
    git ls-remote https://gerrit.googlesource.com/gerrit |wc -c
     2108657
2MB, That's crazy!

>
> At the risk of using this list + the venue for soliciting I also want
> to mention that my employer is willing to pay someone on a contract
> basis to work on Git scalability issues, given the right person etc.
> etc. So if someone's at the conference is interested in that I'd be
> keen to talk to you.

I'm fine with soliciting here on the list for a good cause.
(I was touring Paris yesterday and was near the Eiffel tower and within 15
minutes, there were 4 tries of unsolicited advertising/begging/
[tourist->money conversion scheme])

Re: [ANNOUNCE] Git Merge Contributors Summit, April 8th, Paris

[Jeff King]

On Mon, Apr 06, 2015 at 09:08:54PM +0200, Christian Couder wrote:

> By the way as far as I know nothing has been planned for the
> Contributors Summit on the 8th.

The agenda is open. I had figured we would collectively organize the
schedule in the morning (unconference-style). I'd certainly encourage
people to bring prepared talks or ideas for discussions if they would
like.

> Also I am not sure if something is planned for the evening of the 8th
> or not. If nothing is planned maybe we could discuss having dinner
> together or something.

I don't know of anything planned. Let's discuss it at the event
tomorrow.

-Peff