On Wednesday, 7 September 2022 04:06:14 PDT David Rheinsberg wrote:
> But this behavior is exactly what I am criticizing. In my opinion,
> stating that maintainers are "very busy people" and have "less
> interest" in a supported target does not encourage contribution, nor
> does it establish a welcoming community. It creates a wall between
> contributor and maintainer and gives the impression that the
> maintainers of the projects do not appreciate being addressed. It
> enforces hierarchy, where there is no need for it.

And what would you have us do?

> But this is true for any code. My criticism was that telling people
> change is troublesome will deter them from contributing. What is the
> point of collaboration if we do not appreciate the troubles of change?

So they know upfront that the path they're taking is laden with pitfalls. But 
note that it wasn't a "this will be difficult, you should probably give up". It 
was "this will be difficult but there may be an easier way". We did not 
discourage there being a contribution; we tried to encourage finding one that 
is easier to accept.

If the issue is tone, then I apologise. It was not the intention. But 
unfortunately, cross-cultural misunderstandings do happen.

> I think a lack of replies would have been a more honest representation
> of the current state of D-Bus development, yes. The answers and delays
> in this thread show that the current maintainers of D-Bus are very
> busy and have less interest in such contributions. Moreover, it
> discourages readers from submitting further contributions to D-Bus. A
> lack of replies to this thread would have shown the state of D-Bus
> development equally well without the negativity towards contributors.

Thank you for the feedback. I disagree with the interpretation, because it's 
very subjective. But I understand your point of view.

-- 
Thiago Macieira - thiago (AT) macieira.info - thiago (AT) kde.org
   Software Architect - Intel DCAI Cloud Engineering