Fri, 30 Apr 2010
Dear Mr Neary, thanks for your thought provoking post, I think it is a problem we need to be aware of as Free Software matures.
Firstly though I would like to say that the apparent ageism present in your argument isn't helpful to your point. Your comments appear to diminish the contributions of a whole generation of people. In addition, we shouldn't just be concerned with attracting young people to contribute, the same changes will have likely reduced the chances that people of all ages will get involved.
Aside from that though there is much to discuss. You talk about the changes in Free Software since you got involved, and it mirrors my observations. While these changes may have forced fewer people to learn all the details of how the system works, they have certainly allowed more people to use the software, bringing many different skills to the party with them.
I would contend that often the experience for those looking to do the compilation that you rate as important has parallels to the experience of just using the software you present from a few years ago. If we can change that experience as much as we have the installation and first use experience then we will empower more people to take part in those activities.
It is instructive then to look at how the changes came about to see if there are any pointers for us. I think there are two causes of the change that are of interest to this discussion.
Firstly, one change has been an increased focus on user experience. Designing and building software that serves the users needs has made it much more palatable for people, and reduced the investment that people have to make before using it. In the same way I think we should focus on developer experience, making it more pleasant to perform some of the tasks needed to be a hobbyist. Yes, this means hiding some of the complexity to start with, but that doesn't mean that it can't be delved in to later. Progressive exposure will help people to learn by not requiring them to master the art before being able to do anything.
Secondly, there has been a push to make informed decisions on behalf of the user when providing them with the initial experience. You no longer get a base system after installation, upon which you are expected to select from the thousands of packages to build your perfect environment. Neither are you led to download multiple CDs that contain the entire contents of a distribution, much of which is installed by default. Instead you are given an environment that is already equipped to do common tasks, where each task is covered by an application that has been selected by experts on your behalf.
We should do something similar with developer tools, making opinionated decisions for the new developer, and allowing them to change things as they learn, similar to the way in which you are still free to choose from the thousands of packages in the distribution repositories. Doing this makes documentation easier to write, allows for knowledge sharing, and reduces the chances of paralysis of choice.
There are obviously difficulties with this given that often the choice of tool that one person makes on a project dicatates or heavily influences the choice other people have to make. If you choose autotools for your projects then I can't build it with CMake. Our development tools are important to us as they shape the environment in which we work, so there are strong opinions, but perhaps consistency could become more of a priority. There are also things we can do with libraries, format specifications and wrappers to allow choice while still providing a good experience for the fledgling developer.
Obviously as we are talking about free software the code will always be available, but that isn't enough in my mind. It needs to be easier to go from code to something you can install and remove, allowing you to dig deeper once you have achieved that.
I believe that our effort around things like https://dev.launchpad.net/BuildBranchToArchive will go some way to helping with this.
I'm being serious. The only thing that holds it back is the fact that the most common program with similar keybindings is BASH.
cua-mode is a nice set of training wheels, but not a permanent solution for people who find such a fundamental change emotionally threatening. That said, this can all be solved with some elisp. I know someone who came up with their own alternative to viper and vip, from scratch.
Personally I'm not what most would consider a "developer", but most people would assume that I'm not running anything but Emacs (1/2 of my screen is generally at least one Emacs frame, but often two from different machines. The rest is generally terminal apps and Conkeror.
What does that have to do with anything?
Once you start with Emacs, you can't stop...
Posted by TheGZeus at Sat May 1 04:04:31 2010