Re: [PATCH 0/4] remote-hg: more improvements

quoted

My point was more that it's very hard to produce high quality commits
without social interaction with others explaining what you missed,
stuffs you overlooked, etc.

You are overgeneralizing.  You are assuming that it's easier for
everybody to interact with humans rather than the Tao of Computing.

No, what I'm saying is that most non-trivial patches go through a
review process involving human interactions. It is very hard to
produce a very good non-trivial patch without going through human
interactions, just because someone might ask a question about your
patch. To be honest I'm not interested in fighting over this so let's
agree to disagree.

quoted

Anyway, I think we are speaking about different things. All I'm saying
is that humans are social creatures and that thinking you can
contribute to projects ran by humans without according a high
importance to social behaviors (like Felipe thinks) is not possible.

You are assuming that "according a high importance to social behaviors"
is all that it takes for anybody.  Do you tell the beggar on the next
street corner that "according a high importance to earning millions"
would be all that would be necessary for him to afford anything to drink
that he'd like?

I'm sorry that my words aren't clear enough for you to infer the point
I'm trying to make. Let's try something simpler: what I was saying is
that bad behavior will get you into trouble when contributing (and
thus it's important to behave nicely), where Felipe usualy says bad
behavior is irrelevant because only truth/quality is important.

And programming and social skills tend to be packaged separately.  So
not everybody is gifted with being able to contribute _gracefully_.

Yes it's unfortunate. The amount of talent in our societies that is
wasted because of communication problems is probably quite high. I
didn't find a way around "being social" in any human based community
yet, but if you have an idea please share. The only way I can see
working is that for someone to act as a mediator between the grumpy
contributor and the community, but the role of this person is not very
pleasant. That or maybe have merges done by some kind of robot with
some AI about patch quality, but I doubt it is technically feasible
yet.

Philippe