Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Why kernel development still uses email (2016)

lwn.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 97 posts

Re: Why kernel development still uses email (2016)

#71

Post by gkya »

Tharkun wrote: post #33
na85 wrote: post #6

For 99% of folks outside the HN echo chamber, email works fine. Spam is a problem, but I've never heard or read of anyone who thinks email needs to go the way of the dodo except on this site.

I'm having a really hard time getting my friends to email me. They want me to use awful garbage like FB Messenger or Whatsapp instead.

Sometimes one needs to adapt to the outer world :) I use Whatsapp even though I hate instant messaging and phone calls (I like communicating at my own pace when not face-to-face, and I dislike any sorts of smalltalk on the phone or messaging), because communication is a two-way street, and sometimes conforming is easier. I disable last-online and blue ticks in Whatsapp so it's more e-mail like, definitely improves the experience.

Re: Why kernel development still uses email (2016)

#72

Post by na85 »

abiox wrote: post #64
na85 wrote: post #61

Earlier quoted context omitted.

It was intended to be disparaging: one of my major beefs with this community is the massive culture of groupthink and aggressive self reinforcement/adulation.

> It was intended to be disparaging and thus your thesis of 'HN doesn't like to be reminded' falls to the simpler explanation of 'trashtalk usually gets downvoted'.

Perhaps.

I prefer to see it as the down votes reaffirming that I am correct.

Re: Why kernel development still uses email (2016)

#73

Post by pritambaral »

m-j-fox wrote: post #69

What I want to know is: which of Tower, GitKraken, GitHub Desktop or Stash do the kernel developers prefer?

Doubt they'd prefer any of those. None of those are open source, every single one is a GUI app (which has a history of limiting access to the plumbing that can be provided), and some of those don't even run on Linux.

Re: Why kernel development still uses email (2016)

#74

Post by nextos »

pmoriarty wrote: post #65
nextos wrote: post #62

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sure, all these points are true. Notmuch is a bit unfinished I think. What email setup do you have?

I'm actually using notmuch in emacs myself, but I'm just running in to a bunch of its limitations and looking around for an alternative. Very sorry to hear that Gnus with a notmuch backend is slow, as that's what I was considering trying next.

Maybe give Gnus a try anyway. It might not be that slow on good hardware. Or just run it coupled with a Dovecot server.

I really like Notmuch's interface. I think limitations are perhaps not that hard to patch on Elisp unless you have a complicated setup.

I'm trying to implement a DSL to coordinate tag maildir sync on top of a few macros.

Re: Why kernel development still uses email (2016)

#75

Post by gsich »

na85 wrote: post #72
abiox wrote: post #64

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It was intended to be disparaging and thus your thesis of 'HN doesn't like to be reminded' falls to the simpler explanation of 'trashtalk usually gets downvoted'.

Perhaps. I prefer to see it as the down votes reaffirming that I am correct.

you are correct. if people get triggered by someone using the word "echo chamber" they are probably in one. It's hard to admit, I know.

Re: Why kernel development still uses email (2016)

#76

Post by gsich »

erikbye wrote: post #60
na85 wrote: post #6

For 99% of folks outside the HN echo chamber, email works fine. Spam is a problem, but I've never heard or read of anyone who thinks email needs to go the way of the dodo except on this site.

Email is the pinnacle of human communication. Without notifications, which I, of course, do not use, email is the least intrusive and least disrupting way someone can contact me. I simply check my email when I feel like it, which is about two times daily, morning and sometime late evening. Then, even when I look at my email, I don't have to respond. I don't have to do anything. And if there's an email I want to reply…

It is also the pinnacle of interoperability. Nowadays, two apps in the appstore can't send messages between each other, because reasons. With email you have compatibility between so many vendors, devices, programs, programming languages ... everything is compatible. It is THE standard.

Re: Why kernel development still uses email (2016)

#77

Post by dlp211 »

walshemj wrote: post #70
wmf wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If Linus declared that everyone must use, say, Gitlab from now on, some Linux developers might leave. But developers who don't use email may never start working on Linux. That's why it cuts both ways: either option alienates some developers.

A developer that does not use mail :-) that is very unlikely

A developer that does not use mail for code submission.

Re: Why kernel development still uses email (2016)

#78

Post by emmelaich »

jasode wrote: post #22

>, kernel developers still use email because it is faster than any of the alternatives. Over the course of the last year, the project accepted about eight changes per hour — every hour — from over 4,000 developers sponsored by over 400 companies Compare with Google's ~1875-per-hour from 2015[1]: >, and Google’s 25,000 engineers make about 45,000 commits (changes) to the repository each day. Obviously, we can't extrap…

The great thing about email is that it is asynchronous.

The problem with a ALM is it is a global lock. It is enormously disruptive if it is unavailable or even slow.

Re: Why kernel development still uses email (2016)

#80

Post by mrmondo »

alex-e wrote: post #25
SubiculumCode wrote: post #11

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can we do that with a chat system? Because Slack threading is just inadequate, imo.

I'm trying to solve this right now with eul[0]. It's not an easy task. [0]: https://eul.im

Looking forward to OTR for XMPP :)
Post reply on HN