diff options
Diffstat (limited to '')
6 files changed, 2745 insertions, 7 deletions
diff --git a/2021/captions/emacsconf-2021-forever--m-x-forever-why-emacs-will-outlast-text-editor-trends--david-wilson-system-crafters--chapters.vtt b/2021/captions/emacsconf-2021-forever--m-x-forever-why-emacs-will-outlast-text-editor-trends--david-wilson-system-crafters--chapters.vtt new file mode 100644 index 00000000..32d90f1e --- /dev/null +++ b/2021/captions/emacsconf-2021-forever--m-x-forever-why-emacs-will-outlast-text-editor-trends--david-wilson-system-crafters--chapters.vtt @@ -0,0 +1,61 @@ +WEBVTT + +00:00:01.280 --> 00:00:28.079 +Introduction and conclusion + +00:00:28.080 --> 00:01:07.199 +Who am I? + +00:01:07.200 --> 00:02:26.958 +Is Emacs unpopular? + +00:02:26.959 --> 00:04:15.679 +What does popularity really mean? + +00:04:15.680 --> 00:04:32.399 +How do we measure popularity? + +00:04:32.400 --> 00:06:18.318 +Google Trends + +00:06:18.319 --> 00:08:19.999 +Stack Overflow Survey + +00:08:20.000 --> 00:10:23.199 +Community Activity + +00:10:23.200 --> 00:10:38.319 +How do editors lose popularity? + +00:10:38.320 --> 00:12:25.679 +A new editor with better features appears + +00:12:25.680 --> 00:14:01.039 +Lack of sufficient maintenance + +00:14:01.040 --> 00:14:36.958 +The "fashion" moves on + +00:14:36.959 --> 00:17:10.239 +What happens when an editor loses popularity? + +00:17:10.240 --> 00:17:20.159 +How will Emacs survive *despite* popularity? + +00:17:20.160 --> 00:19:51.439 +Emacs is more deeply hackable than almost all other editors + +00:19:51.440 --> 00:21:15.279 +Emacs has a strong community of highly skilled package authors + +00:21:15.280 --> 00:22:33.439 +Emacs has a very strong user community + +00:22:33.440 --> 00:23:40.959 +The Emacs maintainers and contributors care about the users + +00:23:40.960 --> 00:24:22.879 +Isn't all this supposed to come when an editor is popular? + +00:24:22.880 --> 00:24:23.880 +When someone talks about popularity... diff --git a/2021/captions/emacsconf-2021-forever--m-x-forever-why-emacs-will-outlast-text-editor-trends--david-wilson-system-crafters--main.vtt b/2021/captions/emacsconf-2021-forever--m-x-forever-why-emacs-will-outlast-text-editor-trends--david-wilson-system-crafters--main.vtt new file mode 100644 index 00000000..026216c8 --- /dev/null +++ b/2021/captions/emacsconf-2021-forever--m-x-forever-why-emacs-will-outlast-text-editor-trends--david-wilson-system-crafters--main.vtt @@ -0,0 +1,2674 @@ +WEBVTT + +00:01.280 --> 00:02.800 +Hi everyone! I'm very excited + +00:02.800 --> 00:05.200 +to be here at EmacsConf 2021 today + +00:05.200 --> 00:06.640 +to give my talk called + +00:06.640 --> 00:09.360 +"M-x Forever: How Emacs Will Outlast + +00:09.360 --> 00:11.519 +Text Editor Trends." + +00:11.519 --> 00:13.759 +So let's start with the conclusion first. + +00:13.759 --> 00:15.040 +I know, it's a little bit unorthodox, + +00:15.040 --> 00:16.960 +but let's just try and see what happens. + +00:16.960 --> 00:18.400 +So no matter what happens + +00:18.400 --> 00:19.760 +in the wider software world, + +00:19.760 --> 00:21.520 +GNU Emacs will continue to be + +00:21.520 --> 00:22.640 +a beloved program + +00:22.640 --> 00:24.080 +with a dedicated community + +00:24.080 --> 00:25.199 +and a healthy team + +00:25.199 --> 00:00:28.079 +of maintainers and contributors. + +00:28.080 --> 00:29.439 +You're probably wondering + +00:29.439 --> 00:31.141 +who am I to be making such a claim, + +00:31.141 --> 00:32.640 +so I'll tell you. + +00:32.640 --> 00:34.640 +I am David Wilson, the creator of the + +00:34.640 --> 00:36.000 +System Crafters YouTube channel + +00:36.000 --> 00:38.079 +and community. If you want to see + +00:38.079 --> 00:39.040 +a lot of really great videos + +00:39.040 --> 00:41.280 +about GNU Emacs, GNU Guix, etc., + +00:41.280 --> 00:42.719 +come check out my YouTube channel. + +00:42.719 --> 00:44.480 +I'm also on LBRY and Odysee + +00:44.480 --> 00:46.399 +if you don't want to go use YouTubea + +00:46.399 --> 00:47.360 +And also, if you're the type of person + +00:47.360 --> 00:48.399 +who doesn't want to use + +00:48.399 --> 00:49.680 +any of these websites + +00:49.680 --> 00:51.039 +and you want to see my videos anyway, + +00:51.039 --> 00:52.160 +please just send me an email + +00:52.160 --> 00:53.280 +at the email address below + +00:53.280 --> 00:54.079 +and I'll see if I can set you up + +00:54.079 --> 00:55.520 +with that. You can also check out + +00:55.520 --> 00:58.160 +my website and the places where we chat, + +00:58.160 --> 00:59.440 +especially on libera.chat + +00:59.440 --> 01:01.440 +at the #systemcrafters channel. + +01:01.440 --> 01:02.719 +If you have any thoughts + +01:02.719 --> 01:03.600 +after seeing this talk, + +01:03.600 --> 01:04.799 +please feel free to send me an email + +01:04.799 --> 00:01:07.199 +or find me on chat. + +01:07.200 --> 01:09.920 +So there is a recurring concern + +01:09.920 --> 01:11.119 +in the Emacs community + +01:11.119 --> 01:12.799 +about its popularity. + +01:12.799 --> 01:14.320 +This is something that keeps coming back + +01:14.320 --> 01:16.479 +time and time again. You probably see it + +01:16.479 --> 01:18.640 +every year or two where people on Reddit + +01:18.640 --> 01:19.840 +or maybe on the emacs-devel + +01:19.840 --> 01:21.600 +mailing list are talking about ways + +01:21.600 --> 01:24.000 +to increase Emacs popularity. + +01:24.000 --> 01:25.600 +More recently, there was a discussion + +01:25.600 --> 01:27.600 +on Hacker News where somebody posted + +01:27.600 --> 01:28.159 +a link to this + +01:28.159 --> 01:31.360 +Making Emacs Popular Again blog post + +01:31.360 --> 01:32.479 +which does chronicle some of the + +01:32.479 --> 01:34.479 +more recent discussions on emacs-devel + +01:34.479 --> 01:35.840 +about things that could be done + +01:35.840 --> 01:38.479 +to make Emacs a more popular editor. + +01:38.479 --> 01:40.079 +So the title of my talk claims + +01:40.079 --> 01:41.280 +that Emacs is going to + +01:41.280 --> 01:43.759 +outlast text editor trends. + +01:43.759 --> 01:45.840 +So to elaborate on this claim, + +01:45.840 --> 01:46.799 +we're going to try to answer + +01:46.799 --> 01:48.720 +a few specific questions. + +01:48.720 --> 01:51.200 +First of all, what is popularity + +01:51.200 --> 01:53.280 +and how do you even measure it? + +01:53.280 --> 01:54.240 +If people are saying + +01:54.240 --> 01:55.920 +that Emacs needs to be more popular, + +01:55.920 --> 01:57.040 +then what do we really mean + +01:57.040 --> 01:59.040 +by popularity? + +01:59.040 --> 02:00.159 +Also, what are the benefits + +02:00.159 --> 02:01.920 +of popularity? If emacs did somehow + +02:01.920 --> 02:03.920 +become more popular, what benefits + +02:03.920 --> 02:05.680 +would it receive from that? + +02:05.680 --> 02:07.439 +And also, how does an editor + +02:07.439 --> 02:08.720 +lose popularity, and what are + +02:08.720 --> 02:11.120 +the possible consequences to that? + +02:11.120 --> 02:12.480 +And then what are the unique factors + +02:12.480 --> 02:13.680 +about Emacs that will ensure + +02:13.680 --> 02:16.000 +that it survives long term? + +02:16.000 --> 02:17.520 +What is special about Emacs + +02:17.520 --> 02:19.440 +that will help it to thrive + +02:19.440 --> 02:21.920 +despite whatever happens in the + +02:21.920 --> 02:24.560 +popular sphere of text editors and + +02:24.560 --> 00:02:26.958 +programming languages, etc.? + +02:26.959 --> 02:28.800 +So, first of all, what does popularity + +02:28.800 --> 02:30.720 +really mean? When someone says + +02:30.720 --> 02:32.400 +that Emacs needs to become more popular, + +02:32.400 --> 02:33.680 +what are they really saying + +02:33.680 --> 02:35.840 +is that there needs to be more users, + +02:35.840 --> 02:37.102 +and that they stick around. + +02:37.102 --> 02:38.800 +Like, they learn how to use Emacs + +02:38.800 --> 02:41.680 +and they continue to be users. + +02:41.680 --> 02:42.800 +If we did get those new users, + +02:42.800 --> 02:45.599 +what would it actually do for Emacs? + +02:45.599 --> 02:47.440 +Also, is it that there are + +02:47.440 --> 02:48.959 +more community members that are + +02:48.959 --> 02:51.040 +creating new packages? + +02:51.040 --> 02:52.480 +You know, that sort of assumes + +02:52.480 --> 02:53.519 +that the editor itself + +02:53.519 --> 02:54.720 +doesn't have enough packages, + +02:54.720 --> 02:55.519 +or that the only way + +02:55.519 --> 02:57.120 +that the an editor stays alive + +02:57.120 --> 02:58.800 +is for there to be constant churn, + +02:58.800 --> 03:01.440 +with new packages coming around. + +03:01.440 --> 03:03.120 +Is it that there is more content + +03:03.120 --> 03:04.319 +being created by users, + +03:04.319 --> 03:05.840 +like more blog posts being written, + +03:05.840 --> 03:07.920 +more YouTube videos being made, + +03:07.920 --> 03:09.360 +more other ways that people are + +03:09.360 --> 03:11.599 +evangelizing the use of Emacs + +03:11.599 --> 03:14.720 +and also teaching people how to use it? + +03:14.720 --> 03:16.080 +Also, is it that + +03:16.080 --> 03:18.720 +more long-term stability is had + +03:18.720 --> 03:20.159 +in the editor, and more core + +03:20.159 --> 03:21.280 +improvements that are being made + +03:21.280 --> 03:22.879 +over time? I mean, I guess you could say + +03:22.879 --> 03:23.760 +that it does make sense + +03:23.760 --> 03:25.680 +that if the editor is more popular, + +03:25.680 --> 03:26.959 +then people will be more invested + +03:26.959 --> 03:28.080 +in improving it, and there will be + +03:28.080 --> 03:30.000 +more new contributors coming in, + +03:30.000 --> 03:32.480 +but is greater and greater popularity + +03:32.480 --> 03:33.280 +really what's needed + +03:33.280 --> 03:35.280 +to ensure that this happens? + +03:35.280 --> 03:37.040 +Also, it could just be that + +03:37.040 --> 03:38.080 +there's more validation + +03:38.080 --> 03:40.480 +for someone's personal choices. + +03:40.480 --> 03:42.159 +You know, people tend to use + +03:42.159 --> 03:43.760 +these software choices they use + +03:43.760 --> 03:44.799 +as part of their identity. + +03:44.799 --> 03:46.000 +So is it that they want Emacs + +03:46.000 --> 03:46.799 +to be more popular + +03:46.799 --> 03:48.319 +so that they can finally say, + +03:48.319 --> 03:49.440 +"I'm an Emacs user," + +03:49.440 --> 03:50.080 +and have people think + +03:50.080 --> 03:51.840 +that they're cool or "hip" or whatever? + +03:51.840 --> 03:52.720 +I hope that... Hopefully, + +03:52.720 --> 03:53.370 +that's not the case. + +03:53.370 --> 03:54.239 +Hopefully, it's one of these + +03:54.239 --> 03:56.000 +other points. But it could be something + +03:56.000 --> 03:57.120 +because, as we see, you know, + +03:57.120 --> 03:59.439 +there's a lot of trends and fashion + +03:59.439 --> 04:00.879 +when it comes to software development + +04:00.879 --> 04:02.640 +and also free software + +04:02.640 --> 04:04.159 +and open source tools. + +04:04.159 --> 04:05.840 +So as we go through this talk, + +04:05.840 --> 04:07.200 +keep these questions in mind + +04:07.200 --> 04:07.760 +as we talk about + +04:07.760 --> 04:09.680 +some of the finer points on all of this, + +04:09.680 --> 04:11.280 +and see whether you think + +04:11.280 --> 04:13.680 +that popularity really correlates + +04:13.680 --> 00:04:15.679 +with these things. + +04:15.680 --> 04:17.919 +So first of all, how do we measure + +04:17.919 --> 04:20.720 +popularity? What information do we have + +04:20.720 --> 04:21.600 +to actually determine + +04:21.600 --> 04:23.360 +which editors are popular, + +04:23.360 --> 04:25.199 +and whether they're gaining or losing + +04:25.199 --> 04:26.880 +popularity? So I've got a few, + +04:26.880 --> 04:27.759 +or a couple places here + +04:27.759 --> 04:29.120 +that we can look at + +04:29.120 --> 04:30.560 +to judge the popularity + +04:30.560 --> 00:04:32.399 +of various editors. + +04:32.400 --> 04:33.840 +First of all, Google Trends. + +04:33.840 --> 04:35.199 +Google actually gives us the ability + +04:35.199 --> 04:37.199 +to track and compare search volume + +04:37.199 --> 04:39.040 +for particular terms and topics + +04:39.040 --> 04:41.759 +over time. So if you wanted to know + +04:41.759 --> 04:43.040 +how often someone was searching + +04:43.040 --> 04:44.800 +about Emacs, maybe to try to find help + +04:44.800 --> 04:46.479 +for something, or look for documentation, + +04:46.479 --> 04:48.800 +or maybe look for blog posts, etc., + +04:48.800 --> 04:49.919 +you can look at Google Trends + +04:49.919 --> 04:51.600 +to see how often people are searching + +04:51.600 --> 04:53.440 +for Emacs over time. + +04:53.440 --> 04:55.199 +One useful ability is that we can + +04:55.199 --> 04:57.360 +compare how much people are searching + +04:57.360 --> 04:58.720 +across various different topics + +04:58.720 --> 05:00.000 +and see a graph, which is + +05:00.000 --> 05:01.680 +what i'm going to show you right now. + +05:01.680 --> 05:04.000 +This graph shows you the search volume + +05:04.000 --> 05:06.320 +for Emacs compared to Vim, Atom, + +05:06.320 --> 05:08.800 +Sublime Text, and Visual Studio Code + +05:08.800 --> 05:11.120 +from 2004 to the present + +05:11.120 --> 05:12.880 +worldwide, so all across the world + +05:12.880 --> 05:14.479 +where searches are happening. + +05:14.479 --> 05:16.240 +You can see that in 2004, + +05:16.240 --> 05:18.479 +Emacs is the reigning king supreme + +05:18.479 --> 05:21.039 +where you have the most search terms + +05:21.039 --> 05:22.720 +or searches happening on emacs + +05:22.720 --> 05:25.199 +at that time. Also, Vim is quite high + +05:25.199 --> 05:26.960 +on this list as well. + +05:26.960 --> 05:28.560 +Let's see. Sublime Text is a bit lower + +05:28.560 --> 05:31.120 +in the list, but it's in third place. + +05:31.120 --> 05:32.080 +Nope. Yep. That's right. + +05:32.080 --> 05:34.880 +Then atom is quite low, but I think that + +05:34.880 --> 05:36.320 +Atom didn't exist yet, + +05:36.320 --> 05:37.759 +so maybe at that point, you know, + +05:37.759 --> 05:39.120 +this is probably something else. + +05:39.120 --> 05:41.360 +Google is just getting random data. + +05:41.360 --> 05:42.880 +And then Visual Studio Code + +05:42.880 --> 05:43.919 +also didn't exist, + +05:43.919 --> 05:45.039 +so probably this is like + +05:45.039 --> 05:46.479 +Visual Studio searches, + +05:46.479 --> 05:48.000 +but then as you go across the years, + +05:48.000 --> 05:48.960 +you see that gradually, + +05:48.960 --> 05:52.160 +Emacs popularity appears to be declining. + +05:52.160 --> 05:54.639 +As does Vim, but not quite so much. + +05:54.639 --> 05:56.560 +And then over time, Sublime Text + +05:56.560 --> 05:57.520 +becomes more popular, + +05:57.520 --> 05:59.280 +and then VS Code in more recent years + +05:59.280 --> 06:00.319 +becomes very popular + +06:00.319 --> 06:02.400 +compared to everything else. + +06:02.400 --> 06:04.479 +So it looks like Emacs + +06:04.479 --> 06:06.960 +has declined significantly in popularity, + +06:06.960 --> 06:09.600 +while the other editors have taken over. + +06:09.600 --> 06:11.360 +But is the search volume really + +06:11.360 --> 06:12.800 +the only important factor + +06:12.800 --> 06:14.800 +that indicates popularity or health + +06:14.800 --> 06:16.080 +of a given editor? + +06:16.080 --> 00:06:18.318 +That still remains to be seen. + +06:18.319 --> 06:19.680 +We can also take a look + +06:19.680 --> 06:22.400 +at the yearly survey + +06:22.400 --> 06:24.602 +that the website Stack Overflow puts out + +06:24.602 --> 06:26.533 +asking developers about the tools + +06:26.533 --> 06:27.360 +that they use to find out + +06:27.360 --> 06:28.720 +which ones are being used + +06:28.720 --> 06:29.759 +most frequently and that are + +06:29.759 --> 06:31.919 +gaining popularity over time. + +06:31.919 --> 06:33.680 +So there is a great blog post + +06:33.680 --> 06:35.039 +by someone named Roben Kleene, + +06:35.039 --> 06:37.039 +who synthesizes some + +06:37.039 --> 06:37.840 +of this data together, + +06:37.840 --> 06:39.120 +specifically about editors, + +06:39.120 --> 06:40.240 +and provides us with a graph + +06:40.240 --> 06:41.680 +that we can take a look at + +06:41.680 --> 06:43.440 +that compares the popularity + +06:43.440 --> 06:44.639 +of particular editors + +06:44.639 --> 06:46.560 +in the last maybe four or five years, + +06:46.560 --> 06:49.199 +at least 2015 to 2019, + +06:49.199 --> 06:50.560 +based on the responses + +06:50.560 --> 06:52.560 +to the Stack Overflow survey. + +06:52.560 --> 06:54.479 +In this case we see that + +06:54.479 --> 06:56.560 +Emacs is the light blue line, + +06:56.560 --> 06:59.440 +and it sort of stays in maybe, let's see, + +06:59.440 --> 07:00.960 +maybe third place in the beginning, + +07:00.960 --> 07:02.000 +and then fifth place, + +07:02.000 --> 07:03.520 +and basically just stays in fifth place + +07:03.520 --> 07:05.039 +the whole time, compared to things like + +07:05.039 --> 07:07.120 +Atom, Sublime Text, and VS Code. + +07:07.120 --> 07:08.560 +As we saw before, the VS Code + +07:08.560 --> 07:10.960 +just sort of ramps up at the end. + +07:10.960 --> 07:13.199 +Now, this is another thing + +07:13.199 --> 07:14.560 +that basically is showing us + +07:14.560 --> 07:17.039 +similarly to the Google Trends + +07:17.039 --> 07:19.280 +that Emacs's popularity is not quite + +07:19.280 --> 07:21.840 +as much as other editors out there. + +07:21.840 --> 07:23.840 +You can also look at the 2021 results + +07:23.840 --> 07:26.160 +of the Stack Overflow survey, + +07:26.160 --> 07:27.199 +which I'll show you now, + +07:27.199 --> 07:30.319 +which shows Emacs in 16th place. + +07:30.319 --> 07:31.680 +Let's see. If we look here, + +07:31.680 --> 07:32.960 +we see Visual Studio Code + +07:32.960 --> 07:34.400 +is the most popular, then we have + +07:34.400 --> 07:36.800 +a whole bunch of other well-known editors. + +07:36.800 --> 07:37.840 +Some are kind of surprising, + +07:37.840 --> 07:40.400 +like Notepad++ is quite high up there, + +07:40.400 --> 07:42.080 +but then we have Emacs here + +07:42.080 --> 07:43.199 +coming right in behind + +07:43.199 --> 07:44.879 +PhpStorm and NetBeans, + +07:44.879 --> 07:46.400 +which is pretty funny to me. + +07:46.400 --> 07:48.879 +But it just goes to show you + +07:48.879 --> 07:54.000 +that the Emacs community is smaller + +07:54.000 --> 07:55.599 +than what you might consider + +07:55.599 --> 07:56.960 +for other editors, or at least + +07:56.960 --> 07:58.800 +the Emacs user base, maybe. + +07:58.800 --> 07:59.440 +Maybe it's just the people + +07:59.440 --> 08:00.800 +who actually respond to the survey. + +08:00.800 --> 08:02.080 +You can't really tell for sure + +08:02.080 --> 08:03.759 +because all this data is coming from + +08:03.759 --> 08:05.039 +a self-selected group of people + +08:05.039 --> 08:06.720 +who have responded to the survey. + +08:06.720 --> 08:08.879 +So I think what... Basically, + +08:08.879 --> 08:10.560 +what I'm trying to say is that + +08:10.560 --> 08:12.080 +if you look at all these things, + +08:12.080 --> 08:14.080 +you would probably get the perception + +08:14.080 --> 08:15.919 +that Emacs is dead + +08:15.919 --> 08:17.199 +and that maybe nobody really + +08:17.199 --> 08:18.240 +uses the editor anymore, + +08:18.240 --> 00:08:19.999 +or that it's on its way out. + +08:20.000 --> 08:21.599 +However, I think there's another way + +08:21.599 --> 08:24.879 +to look at the health or popularity + +08:24.879 --> 08:27.280 +of Emacs (or any other editor, really), + +08:27.280 --> 08:28.240 +and that is to judge + +08:28.240 --> 08:29.520 +the popularity and health + +08:29.520 --> 08:30.240 +by taking a look + +08:30.240 --> 08:32.080 +at the community activity + +08:32.080 --> 08:33.680 +in places such as Reddit, + +08:33.680 --> 08:35.760 +or maybe on Discord servers, + +08:35.760 --> 08:38.880 +Slack servers, IRC channels, + +08:38.880 --> 08:40.000 +mailing lists, particularly + +08:40.000 --> 08:41.120 +on emacs-devel, + +08:41.120 --> 08:42.640 +where all of the conversation + +08:42.640 --> 08:45.120 +about the development of Emacs happens. + +08:45.120 --> 08:46.640 +Blogs. There's quite a lot of people + +08:46.640 --> 08:47.519 +in the Emacs community + +08:47.519 --> 08:48.959 +writing blog posts. + +08:48.959 --> 08:50.640 +There's quite a few YouTube channels now + +08:50.640 --> 08:52.399 +making content about Emacs + +08:52.399 --> 08:53.839 +pretty frequently, and then + +08:53.839 --> 08:56.880 +conferences like this one, EmacsConf. + +08:56.880 --> 08:58.399 +If you've spent any time + +08:58.399 --> 08:59.600 +in any of these places recently, + +08:59.600 --> 09:00.640 +did you actually get the sense + +09:00.640 --> 09:03.440 +that Emacs community lacks activity? + +09:03.440 --> 09:04.800 +I personally don't. + +09:04.800 --> 09:06.560 +I see quite a lot of activity on Reddit, + +09:06.560 --> 09:07.360 +I see a lot of activity + +09:07.360 --> 09:08.320 +in various other places, + +09:08.320 --> 09:11.040 +even my own chats that I've created. + +09:11.040 --> 09:12.480 +Lots of people talking about Emacs + +09:12.480 --> 09:16.320 +every day. But this is harder to measure, + +09:16.320 --> 09:18.160 +because you would have to go count + +09:18.160 --> 09:21.279 +all of the mailing list emails + +09:21.279 --> 09:22.560 +compared to other editors, + +09:22.560 --> 09:23.760 +or maybe like the Reddit posts + +09:23.760 --> 09:24.959 +compared to other editors. + +09:24.959 --> 09:26.880 +We could do that, but really, + +09:26.880 --> 09:27.839 +the more important thing + +09:27.839 --> 09:29.920 +is to just go experience the community + +09:29.920 --> 09:31.279 +by going to one of these places + +09:31.279 --> 09:33.360 +and take a look at what's going on. + +09:33.360 --> 09:34.560 +You can get a really good sense of that + +09:34.560 --> 09:37.760 +by checking out Sacha Chua's Emacs News + +09:37.760 --> 09:39.120 +roll-up blog posts + +09:39.120 --> 09:40.399 +that come out every week. + +09:40.399 --> 09:42.000 +It's a very good distillation of things + +09:42.000 --> 09:42.560 +that are happening + +09:42.560 --> 09:43.920 +in the Emacs community. + +09:43.920 --> 09:48.080 +If you look at those things + +09:48.080 --> 09:49.040 +and look at all that, + +09:49.040 --> 09:50.640 +you can tell that there is actually + +09:50.640 --> 09:51.360 +something happening + +09:51.360 --> 09:52.240 +in the Emacs community + +09:52.240 --> 09:54.000 +that is more than what you see + +09:54.000 --> 09:55.680 +in the numbers on Google Trends + +09:55.680 --> 09:58.080 +and on Stack Overflow. + +09:58.080 --> 09:59.200 +Another interesting point + +09:59.200 --> 10:00.480 +that doesn't really fit into all this, + +10:00.480 --> 10:01.440 +but if you want to look + +10:01.440 --> 10:02.640 +at the actual data + +10:02.640 --> 10:03.920 +from the Emacs community + +10:03.920 --> 10:06.160 +about how the community uses Emacs, + +10:06.160 --> 10:06.880 +check out the results + +10:06.880 --> 10:08.480 +of the 2020 Emacs survey. + +10:08.480 --> 10:09.040 +I'm sure there's going to be + +10:09.040 --> 10:11.760 +another Emacs survey at some point soon, + +10:11.760 --> 10:13.120 +as well, but that will give you + +10:13.120 --> 10:14.480 +some insight into what's happening + +10:14.480 --> 10:16.000 +within the community itself. + +10:16.000 --> 10:16.399 +You can see that + +10:16.399 --> 10:17.600 +there's quite a lot of activity + +10:17.600 --> 10:19.839 +and a lot of different use cases for Emacs + +10:19.839 --> 00:10:23.199 +and types of people who are using Emacs. + +10:23.200 --> 10:24.000 +Let's talk about + +10:24.000 --> 10:26.079 +how editors lose popularity. + +10:26.079 --> 10:26.880 +So people are worried + +10:26.880 --> 10:29.360 +that Emacs is going to lose popularity. + +10:29.360 --> 10:31.440 +What do they worry is going to happen + +10:31.440 --> 10:34.000 +if that happens? + +10:37.040 --> 00:10:38.319 +Or how actually could it happen? + +10:38.320 --> 10:39.680 +So maybe a new editor + +10:39.680 --> 10:41.839 +with better features appears. + +10:41.839 --> 10:43.440 +So one theory for why users + +10:43.440 --> 10:45.920 +left TextMate for Sublime Text... + +10:45.920 --> 10:46.880 +If you don't know about TextMate, + +10:46.880 --> 10:49.600 +it was a very popular editor on macOS + +10:49.600 --> 10:52.160 +back probably in the Ruby on Rails craze + +10:52.160 --> 10:54.079 +time frame, maybe like the mid-2000s, + +10:54.079 --> 10:57.200 +2005 or so. Then eventually Sublime Text + +10:57.200 --> 10:59.519 +came along, and it had + +10:59.519 --> 11:01.360 +a better extensibility API + +11:01.360 --> 11:03.200 +and really good performance. + +11:03.200 --> 11:05.200 +It also was able to use + +11:05.200 --> 11:07.040 +some of the same stuff from TextMate, + +11:07.040 --> 11:08.720 +like these syntax highlighting grammars + +11:08.720 --> 11:11.040 +and the snippet definitions, etc. + +11:11.040 --> 11:12.240 +So you had TextMate + +11:12.240 --> 11:13.519 +which was a well-loved editor, + +11:13.519 --> 11:15.200 +but then a new editor called Sublime Text + +11:15.200 --> 11:17.200 +came along with better functionality, + +11:17.200 --> 11:18.880 +and people started switching over to it + +11:18.880 --> 11:20.160 +because it could do more things + +11:20.160 --> 11:21.680 +and the user had more ability + +11:21.680 --> 11:24.399 +to add functionality to it. + +11:24.399 --> 11:26.880 +Also, VS Code came along + +11:26.880 --> 11:27.920 +and used a similar model + +11:27.920 --> 11:29.120 +to the Atom editor, + +11:29.120 --> 11:31.360 +basically being a web-based editor + +11:31.360 --> 11:32.480 +using Electron, + +11:32.480 --> 11:34.640 +but it greatly improved upon performance + +11:34.640 --> 11:36.640 +and IDE tooling ecosystem. + +11:36.640 --> 11:38.640 +For people getting real work done + +11:38.640 --> 11:39.519 +with large projects, + +11:39.519 --> 11:41.120 +you need to have things like IntelliSense, + +11:41.120 --> 11:42.800 +and being able to find definitions + +11:42.800 --> 11:45.839 +of functions or classes that are defined. + +11:45.839 --> 11:47.040 +So you have a new editor + +11:47.040 --> 11:47.519 +that comes along + +11:47.519 --> 11:49.440 +that has basically better functionality + +11:49.440 --> 11:51.279 +than the one that was there before. + +11:51.279 --> 11:52.399 +But the thing is, + +11:52.399 --> 11:53.760 +if you have a new editor that comes along + +11:53.760 --> 11:54.720 +with better functionality, + +11:54.720 --> 11:57.120 +it still has to be at least as good as + +11:57.120 --> 11:58.800 +or better than the previous editor + +11:58.800 --> 12:00.000 +for people to stick with it. + +12:00.000 --> 12:02.480 +So it's a very tall order + +12:02.480 --> 12:03.680 +for someone to say + +12:03.680 --> 12:05.200 +there's going to be some editor + +12:05.200 --> 12:05.839 +that will come along + +12:05.839 --> 12:07.040 +that would be better than Emacs + +12:07.040 --> 12:08.240 +on every dimension, + +12:08.240 --> 12:09.680 +because there are some unique dimensions + +12:09.680 --> 12:11.360 +that are hard to beat + +12:11.360 --> 12:14.160 +in an editor like Emacs. + +12:14.160 --> 12:15.920 +Lack of sufficient maintenance. + +12:15.920 --> 12:16.560 +That's one thing + +12:16.560 --> 12:17.600 +that could possibly happen + +12:17.600 --> 12:19.279 +if an editor loses popularity. + +12:19.279 --> 12:20.687 +So maybe sometimes... + +12:20.687 --> 12:22.480 +Sorry, that's something + +12:22.480 --> 12:23.440 +that can cause a lack, + +12:23.440 --> 00:12:25.679 +a loss of popularity. + +12:25.680 --> 12:26.959 +Sometimes the development team + +12:26.959 --> 12:28.320 +for an editor either moves on + +12:28.320 --> 12:29.279 +or maybe switches focus + +12:29.279 --> 12:30.720 +to a different project. + +12:30.720 --> 12:32.079 +When this happens, the development + +12:32.079 --> 12:33.360 +of the editor can stagnate, + +12:33.360 --> 12:36.240 +giving the impression that it's dead. + +12:37.279 --> 12:38.160 +You can see this happening + +12:38.160 --> 12:40.720 +a lot of times on repositories + +12:40.720 --> 12:41.920 +for open source projects, + +12:41.920 --> 12:43.440 +where if someone doesn't make any commits + +12:43.440 --> 12:44.639 +or adding new features for a while, + +12:44.639 --> 12:45.839 +people just automatically assume + +12:45.839 --> 12:46.880 +that the thing is dead, + +12:46.880 --> 12:48.399 +even if it's in a very stable state + +12:48.399 --> 12:49.920 +and doesn't really need any improvements + +12:49.920 --> 12:53.680 +to be made. This is something + +12:53.680 --> 12:55.360 +that can happen over time. + +12:55.360 --> 12:56.720 +The developers of Sublime Text + +12:56.720 --> 12:57.920 +sometimes give the impression + +12:57.920 --> 12:59.519 +that the editor isn't being maintained + +12:59.519 --> 13:02.000 +because of long breaks between updates, + +13:02.000 --> 13:03.360 +and this gives people... + +13:03.360 --> 13:04.560 +If you go search for + +13:04.560 --> 13:05.440 +"Is Sublime Text dead?", + +13:05.440 --> 13:06.800 +you'll see posts about this + +13:07.519 --> 13:08.240 +every couple years, + +13:08.240 --> 13:09.120 +where people are wondering + +13:09.120 --> 13:10.320 +what's happening with Sublime Text, + +13:10.320 --> 13:12.320 +when in reality, there's actually + +13:12.320 --> 13:15.120 +development happening on this project, + +13:15.120 --> 13:18.160 +and paid users are getting these updates + +13:18.160 --> 13:19.279 +because they've paid, + +13:19.279 --> 13:20.639 +but the product is not open source. + +13:20.639 --> 13:21.600 +You have no visibility + +13:21.600 --> 13:22.399 +into the development. + +13:22.399 --> 13:24.639 +So if people have the perception + +13:24.639 --> 13:26.160 +that the editor is not being maintained, + +13:26.160 --> 13:26.880 +then there's going to be + +13:26.880 --> 13:28.079 +rumors getting started, + +13:28.079 --> 13:29.200 +and that could cause + +13:29.200 --> 13:30.959 +the mentality of people to shift + +13:30.959 --> 13:32.639 +and try to move on to other editors + +13:32.639 --> 13:34.240 +because they perceive them to be + +13:34.240 --> 13:36.399 +more well-maintained or more active. + +13:36.399 --> 13:37.920 +Another problem can be that there are + +13:37.920 --> 13:39.839 +major bugs that persist over a long time + +13:39.839 --> 13:41.040 +that aren't being fixed + +13:41.040 --> 13:42.560 +while the maintainers are focusing on + +13:42.560 --> 13:44.639 +some other efforts in the project, + +13:44.639 --> 13:46.000 +and this could hurt sentiment + +13:46.000 --> 13:48.160 +in the community and cause a backlash + +13:48.160 --> 13:49.120 +leading to an exodus. + +13:49.120 --> 13:51.120 +So if you have really bad bugs + +13:51.120 --> 13:51.600 +and people think + +13:51.600 --> 13:52.560 +that you're not really concerned + +13:52.560 --> 13:53.519 +about fixing them, + +13:53.519 --> 13:54.399 +then that could be something + +13:54.399 --> 13:55.360 +that would cause an editor + +13:55.360 --> 13:56.399 +to lose popularity + +13:56.399 --> 13:58.000 +as people move on to find something else + +13:58.000 --> 00:14:01.039 +that appears to be more stable. + +14:01.040 --> 14:03.199 +Lastly, sometimes all it takes is + +14:03.199 --> 14:04.480 +for a new programming language + +14:04.480 --> 14:05.279 +to become popular + +14:05.279 --> 14:06.880 +or for an influential person to say + +14:06.880 --> 14:08.720 +that they switched to a different editor, + +14:08.720 --> 14:14.560 +because people are capable of being led + +14:14.560 --> 14:16.720 +by someone else who is influential, + +14:16.720 --> 14:18.320 +so sometimes it's just... + +14:18.320 --> 14:20.240 +All it takes is someone to say, you know, + +14:20.240 --> 14:22.240 +I'm not going to use this editor any more, + +14:22.240 --> 14:24.000 +and other people will follow. + +14:24.000 --> 14:26.240 +But oftentimes, it's not just about + +14:26.240 --> 14:27.199 +the fashion changing, + +14:27.199 --> 14:28.560 +it's also there's other problems + +14:28.560 --> 14:29.040 +that are happening. + +14:29.040 --> 14:29.680 +Some of these other things + +14:29.680 --> 14:30.959 +that I mentioned before + +14:30.959 --> 14:32.160 +that could be contributing + +14:32.160 --> 14:33.839 +to this overall sentiment + +14:33.839 --> 00:14:36.958 +that caused people to move on. + +14:36.959 --> 14:38.000 +So then what happens + +14:38.000 --> 14:40.000 +when an editor loses popularity? + +14:40.000 --> 14:40.800 +If people are worried + +14:40.800 --> 14:43.120 +that Emacs is going to lose popularity, + +14:43.120 --> 14:44.880 +what happens if it doesn't gain more? + +14:44.880 --> 14:47.839 +So what are the possible consequences? + +14:47.839 --> 14:49.120 +Well, maybe core maintainers + +14:49.120 --> 14:50.399 +will gradually leave the project + +14:50.399 --> 14:52.160 +with nobody to replace them. I mean, + +14:52.160 --> 14:53.839 +if you have a project like Emacs + +14:53.839 --> 14:57.199 +where there's a core + +14:57.199 --> 14:58.240 +that's written in a language + +14:58.240 --> 14:59.600 +that's different than the language + +14:59.600 --> 15:01.040 +everybody uses to extend it, + +15:01.040 --> 15:02.240 +then maybe it's risky + +15:02.240 --> 15:03.440 +to have people leave the project + +15:03.440 --> 15:04.800 +because you don't have other people + +15:04.800 --> 15:06.560 +to come along who can help maintain it + +15:06.560 --> 15:10.240 +and to carry on the knowledge of the core. + +15:10.240 --> 15:11.519 +Also, maybe no new features + +15:11.519 --> 15:13.279 +are being added to stay competitive + +15:13.279 --> 15:14.800 +with other editors. + +15:14.800 --> 15:15.920 +So this is one of these things + +15:15.920 --> 15:17.120 +where people kind of feel like + +15:17.120 --> 15:18.800 +there's a feature mill, where you know + +15:18.800 --> 15:20.880 +if new features are coming online + +15:20.880 --> 15:21.680 +in other editors, + +15:21.680 --> 15:23.279 +maybe your editor needs to catch up. + +15:23.279 --> 15:24.160 +Well, I don't really think that + +15:24.160 --> 15:25.279 +that's necessarily needed, + +15:25.279 --> 15:28.160 +but if there are new paradigms + +15:28.160 --> 15:29.839 +or usage patterns or workflows + +15:29.839 --> 15:32.320 +that are becoming... + +15:32.320 --> 15:33.759 +I guess you could say mainstream, + +15:33.759 --> 15:34.800 +sometimes it does make sense + +15:34.800 --> 15:37.199 +for an editor to be able to adopt these, + +15:37.199 --> 15:37.759 +but if you have + +15:37.759 --> 15:39.519 +a sufficiently extendable editor, + +15:39.519 --> 15:41.440 +then oftentimes, you don't really need to + +15:41.440 --> 15:42.079 +do anything other than + +15:42.079 --> 15:44.480 +just write a new package. + +15:44.480 --> 15:46.160 +Critical bugs that never get fixed... + +15:46.160 --> 15:48.240 +I mean, if people start to drift off + +15:48.240 --> 15:49.839 +from the project, it is much more likely + +15:49.839 --> 15:52.720 +that bad bugs won't get fixed over time. + +15:52.720 --> 15:54.079 +Less community interest in creating + +15:54.079 --> 15:55.199 +and maintaining packages. + +15:55.199 --> 15:56.320 +There's another possibility + +15:56.320 --> 15:57.519 +if people don't feel like + +15:57.519 --> 15:58.880 +it's worth their time anymore + +15:58.880 --> 16:00.079 +because not many people + +16:00.079 --> 16:00.880 +are using an editor, + +16:00.880 --> 16:02.480 +maybe they'll have more users + +16:02.480 --> 16:03.279 +or more interaction + +16:03.279 --> 16:04.959 +if they go write a similar package + +16:04.959 --> 16:07.440 +for a different editor. + +16:07.440 --> 16:10.079 +Less blog posts, videos, content. + +16:10.079 --> 16:11.519 +Basically, like, if people feel + +16:11.519 --> 16:12.480 +that it's not worth their time + +16:12.480 --> 16:13.839 +to make content about the editor either, + +16:13.839 --> 16:15.360 +or if you're just not interested any more, + +16:15.360 --> 16:17.040 +then those things will dry up. + +16:17.040 --> 16:18.639 +And also one thing that is possible, + +16:18.639 --> 16:19.839 +but probably not very likely, + +16:19.839 --> 16:21.839 +is that the program may not be + +16:21.839 --> 16:24.000 +packaged any more in Linux distributions + +16:24.000 --> 16:25.680 +or for other operating systems. + +16:25.680 --> 16:27.519 +So if it's not worth someone to package it, + +16:27.519 --> 16:29.040 +or they just sort of lose interest + +16:29.040 --> 16:31.360 +in the editor, then maybe those things + +16:31.360 --> 16:32.320 +sort of drift away + +16:32.320 --> 16:33.920 +and you can't even install it any more + +16:33.920 --> 16:35.360 +in many places. + +16:35.360 --> 16:36.399 +But I feel that these things + +16:36.399 --> 16:37.279 +would only really happen + +16:37.279 --> 16:39.279 +if there was already other major issues + +16:39.279 --> 16:41.920 +in the dev team or in the community, + +16:41.920 --> 16:44.320 +like maybe a high profile schism + +16:44.320 --> 16:45.199 +in the maintainer team, + +16:45.199 --> 16:47.519 +sort of like what we saw with GNU Emacs + +16:47.519 --> 16:49.759 +versus XEmacs, because you have + +16:49.759 --> 16:50.959 +two competing versions + +16:50.959 --> 16:52.160 +of the same idea + +16:52.160 --> 16:53.600 +with different implementations, + +16:53.600 --> 16:54.800 +and then over time, + +16:54.800 --> 16:55.920 +one of them may fade out + +16:55.920 --> 16:57.839 +because people just lose interest + +16:57.839 --> 17:00.800 +and maybe something like GNU Emacs + +17:00.800 --> 17:02.399 +gradually catches up and surpasses it + +17:02.399 --> 17:04.720 +in functionality. So these things + +17:04.720 --> 17:07.520 +can happen, but it's not really + +17:07.520 --> 00:17:10.239 +as likely as people would think, I think. + +17:10.240 --> 17:12.959 +So how is Emacs going to survive + +17:12.959 --> 17:15.280 +despite popularity? I feel that + +17:15.280 --> 17:16.640 +there are a few important + +17:16.640 --> 17:17.679 +and unique factors + +17:17.679 --> 00:17:20.159 +that are going to contribute to this. + +17:20.160 --> 17:21.520 +First of all, Emacs is + +17:21.520 --> 17:22.720 +more deeply hackable + +17:22.720 --> 17:24.959 +than almost all other editors. + +17:24.959 --> 17:26.000 +I'm couching that a bit, + +17:26.000 --> 17:26.880 +but really it is + +17:26.880 --> 17:28.000 +basically more extensible + +17:28.000 --> 17:28.960 +than any other editor. + +17:28.960 --> 17:29.679 +I haven't seen one + +17:29.679 --> 17:31.440 +that's more extensible than Emacs so far, + +17:31.440 --> 17:32.000 +and that's because + +17:32.000 --> 17:34.160 +Emacs was designed for this. + +17:34.160 --> 17:35.360 +The whole point of Emacs + +17:35.360 --> 17:36.960 +is that you should be able to go in + +17:36.960 --> 17:38.320 +and customize your workflow, + +17:38.320 --> 17:39.600 +and customize the editor to do + +17:39.600 --> 17:41.039 +exactly what you want it to do. + +17:41.039 --> 17:44.080 +It's this whole idea of user freedom. + +17:44.080 --> 17:46.320 +You're not letting the editor designer + +17:46.320 --> 17:47.120 +tell you what to do, + +17:47.120 --> 17:48.880 +you're telling the editor what to do + +17:48.880 --> 17:50.559 +at every step of the way. + +17:50.559 --> 17:53.440 +Also, an Emacs user can grow their skills + +17:53.440 --> 17:55.039 +from small configuration tweaks, + +17:55.039 --> 17:56.240 +just basically setting variables + +17:56.240 --> 17:57.280 +and whatnot, to writing + +17:57.280 --> 17:58.960 +their own packages over time, + +17:58.960 --> 17:59.600 +and then eventually + +17:59.600 --> 18:01.280 +to contributing to Emacs itself-- + +18:01.280 --> 18:02.320 +the same skill set, + +18:02.320 --> 18:03.360 +because the majority + +18:03.360 --> 18:04.640 +of the functionality of the editor + +18:04.640 --> 18:06.160 +is written with the same language + +18:06.160 --> 18:07.600 +that you use to configure it. + +18:07.600 --> 18:09.280 +So unlike other editors, + +18:09.280 --> 18:10.960 +where you have... + +18:10.960 --> 18:12.960 +the way that you write extensions + +18:12.960 --> 18:13.440 +for the editor, + +18:13.440 --> 18:14.960 +that has a specific API, + +18:14.960 --> 18:16.400 +but if you go contribute to the core, + +18:16.400 --> 18:18.160 +the code base is completely different. + +18:18.160 --> 18:19.280 +It's different with Emacs + +18:19.280 --> 18:22.640 +because you have basically the same APIs, + +18:22.640 --> 18:24.320 +the same code and same everything + +18:24.320 --> 18:26.080 +that you use to write a package + +18:26.080 --> 18:28.160 +versus writing actual code + +18:28.160 --> 18:29.600 +for functionality for the editor. + +18:29.600 --> 18:30.960 +Now obviously, there's the C layer + +18:30.960 --> 18:32.000 +that is different, + +18:32.000 --> 18:34.000 +but I think a lot of the actual packages + +18:34.000 --> 18:35.280 +and functionality in Emacs + +18:35.280 --> 18:36.640 +are at the Emacs Lisp layer. + +18:36.640 --> 18:38.797 +So what this means is that + +18:38.797 --> 18:41.120 +Emacs configuration hackers + +18:41.120 --> 18:42.000 +and package authors + +18:42.000 --> 18:43.200 +are prime candidates + +18:43.200 --> 18:44.880 +for eventually becoming contributors + +18:44.880 --> 18:46.960 +to Emacs itself. You see this play out + +18:46.960 --> 18:48.559 +a lot of times in Emacs community, + +18:48.559 --> 18:49.760 +where someone writes + +18:49.760 --> 18:51.039 +some really good packages, + +18:51.039 --> 18:52.240 +and either parts of those + +18:52.240 --> 18:53.440 +get merged into Emacs + +18:53.440 --> 18:55.520 +or that person maybe makes contributions + +18:55.520 --> 18:57.280 +to Emacs to add new functionality + +18:57.280 --> 18:59.360 +that their own packages can use, + +18:59.360 --> 19:01.679 +or just to improve Emacs as a whole. + +19:01.679 --> 19:03.679 +So there's much more chance + +19:03.679 --> 19:04.880 +that people who are involved + +19:04.880 --> 19:06.160 +in the community of Emacs + +19:06.160 --> 19:07.440 +can actually become contributors + +19:07.440 --> 19:08.480 +to the project itself. + +19:08.480 --> 19:09.200 +I think that's going to be + +19:09.200 --> 19:11.600 +very important for its health. + +19:11.600 --> 19:13.200 +Also, you don't need to add functionality + +19:13.200 --> 19:14.080 +to Emacs core + +19:14.080 --> 19:16.160 +to make the editor itself better. + +19:16.160 --> 19:17.120 +Package authors are on + +19:17.120 --> 19:18.480 +an equal playing field + +19:18.480 --> 19:19.679 +as the built-in functionality, + +19:19.679 --> 19:21.008 +for the same reason what I said before. + +19:21.008 --> 19:22.640 +Everything's written with Emacs Lisp, + +19:22.640 --> 19:24.160 +or I guess a lot of the functionality + +19:24.160 --> 19:26.000 +is written with Emacs Lisp. + +19:26.000 --> 19:28.720 +Since there's a lot of ways to hook into + +19:28.720 --> 19:30.720 +or replace functionality in Emacs, + +19:30.720 --> 19:33.280 +you can do a lot of deep customizations + +19:33.280 --> 19:35.360 +to Emacs itself to make it better + +19:35.360 --> 19:37.600 +in ways that aren't really... + +19:37.600 --> 19:39.760 +The core developers don't need to + +19:39.760 --> 19:40.960 +add new things for you to do that. + +19:40.960 --> 19:42.320 +You can just do it if you want to. + +19:42.320 --> 19:44.640 +So that gives Emacs more of + +19:44.640 --> 19:45.840 +a platform feel + +19:45.840 --> 19:47.440 +rather than just being an editor + +19:47.440 --> 00:19:51.439 +that can't really be changed very much. + +19:51.440 --> 19:53.440 +Also, Emacs has a strong community + +19:53.440 --> 19:56.080 +of highly-skilled packaged authors + +19:56.080 --> 19:58.000 +and the high-quality packages + +19:58.000 --> 19:59.919 +that they create make it far better + +19:59.919 --> 20:01.679 +and more uniquely valuable + +20:01.679 --> 20:02.960 +than many other editors. + +20:02.960 --> 20:04.960 +Specifically, things like Org mode, + +20:04.960 --> 20:06.240 +Magit, Org-roam, + +20:06.240 --> 20:07.039 +and a lot of other things + +20:07.039 --> 20:08.000 +that we've talked about + +20:08.000 --> 20:10.000 +on the System Crafters channel over time, + +20:10.000 --> 20:11.136 +and the hundreds of other + +20:11.136 --> 20:12.480 +workflow-improving packages + +20:12.480 --> 20:14.720 +that have been created over the years. + +20:14.720 --> 20:18.559 +So all these things really make Emacs + +20:18.559 --> 20:20.159 +a unique offering + +20:20.159 --> 20:21.679 +in the space of text editors, + +20:21.679 --> 20:22.640 +or development tools, + +20:22.640 --> 20:24.240 +or even just general + +20:24.240 --> 20:25.440 +information management tools, + +20:25.440 --> 20:27.120 +or desktop environments, + +20:27.120 --> 20:28.960 +if you want to call it that. + +20:28.960 --> 20:31.280 +So the people who are involved + +20:31.280 --> 20:32.159 +in making these things + +20:32.159 --> 20:33.600 +make Emacs far better than it could be + +20:33.600 --> 20:35.039 +just by itself, + +20:35.039 --> 20:37.360 +and this thriving ecosystem helps Emacs + +20:37.360 --> 20:39.120 +to continually feel fresh, + +20:39.120 --> 20:40.320 +regardless of what's happening + +20:40.320 --> 20:41.600 +in core Emacs development, + +20:41.600 --> 20:43.840 +because packages can do so much + +20:43.840 --> 20:45.280 +and because people can come along + +20:45.280 --> 20:46.640 +and propose sort of + +20:46.640 --> 20:47.760 +a new way of doing things + +20:47.760 --> 20:49.360 +and other people can start using it. + +20:49.360 --> 20:51.120 +Emacs itself doesn't have to be + +20:51.120 --> 20:52.400 +beholden to just what + +20:52.400 --> 20:53.840 +the core developers do. + +20:53.840 --> 20:55.280 +The community can also play + +20:55.280 --> 20:57.760 +a major role in making Emacs feel fresh + +20:57.760 --> 20:59.919 +and be modernized over time. + +20:59.919 --> 21:01.360 +Just take a look at what Doom Emacs + +21:01.360 --> 21:03.919 +is doing to give Emacs a better face, + +21:03.919 --> 21:04.960 +and Spacemacs as well. + +21:04.960 --> 21:06.240 +Those things are very good + +21:06.240 --> 21:08.000 +for making Emacs more palatable + +21:08.000 --> 21:09.440 +to the general public, + +21:09.440 --> 21:11.120 +because you have a much better experience + +21:11.120 --> 21:12.240 +out of the box, and a lot of things + +21:12.240 --> 21:12.880 +have been polished + +21:12.880 --> 00:21:15.279 +for the user experience. + +21:15.280 --> 21:17.200 +Emacs also has a very strong + +21:17.200 --> 21:18.799 +user community. Lots of activity + +21:18.799 --> 21:20.000 +and discussion about emacs + +21:20.000 --> 21:21.440 +is taking place all the time + +21:21.440 --> 21:22.559 +in various places, + +21:22.559 --> 21:23.919 +like we talked about before. + +21:23.919 --> 21:26.559 +Mailing lists, IRC, Reddit, etc. + +21:26.559 --> 21:28.159 +If you get into Emacs + +21:28.159 --> 21:28.880 +and you go take part + +21:28.880 --> 21:29.840 +in the Emacs community, + +21:29.840 --> 21:30.640 +there's always going to be + +21:30.640 --> 21:32.000 +somebody around who's going to want to + +21:32.000 --> 21:33.520 +talk about Emacs with you + +21:33.520 --> 21:34.960 +and answer your questions. + +21:34.960 --> 21:37.120 +So it's a very good thing + +21:37.120 --> 21:39.039 +for the health of the project + +21:39.039 --> 21:40.320 +because there's a lot of people there + +21:40.320 --> 21:42.640 +that are very invested in it every day + +21:42.640 --> 21:45.120 +and want to see it succeed. + +21:45.120 --> 21:47.039 +Also, there's many community members + +21:47.039 --> 21:47.840 +writing articles + +21:47.840 --> 21:49.440 +and making videos about Emacs, + +21:49.440 --> 21:51.280 +many of which are actually moving forward + +21:51.280 --> 21:52.240 +the state of the art + +21:52.240 --> 21:53.679 +about how we use the editor, + +21:53.679 --> 21:55.360 +and how we use it... I mean, + +21:55.360 --> 21:56.480 +how many times have you seen + +21:56.480 --> 21:57.520 +a really great blog post + +21:57.520 --> 21:59.120 +that completely blew your mind + +21:59.120 --> 22:00.880 +and showed you a new way + +22:00.880 --> 22:02.720 +to use Emacs, or a new way to think about + +22:02.720 --> 22:05.120 +how you use Emacs. I see stuff like that + +22:05.120 --> 22:08.480 +all the time, like posts by Protesilaos, + +22:08.480 --> 22:10.640 +or by Karthik, or by many other people + +22:10.640 --> 22:12.080 +who show you a new way + +22:12.080 --> 22:13.360 +to look at things, and then you're, like, + +22:13.360 --> 22:14.720 +Wow. This... I could do things + +22:14.720 --> 22:15.200 +completely different + +22:15.200 --> 22:16.559 +than I was doing before. + +22:16.559 --> 22:17.200 +This kind of stuff + +22:17.200 --> 22:18.240 +is extremely important + +22:18.240 --> 22:20.080 +for the health of the editor + +22:20.080 --> 22:22.799 +going forward, because people are able to + +22:22.799 --> 22:24.799 +inspire others to use the editor. + +22:24.799 --> 22:26.559 +It's a great thing for evangelism as well. + +22:26.559 --> 22:28.080 +Like, if someone happens to + +22:28.080 --> 22:30.080 +stumble across a video or a blog post, + +22:30.080 --> 00:22:33.439 +they may be really inspired to use Emacs. + +22:33.440 --> 22:35.280 +And lastly, the Emacs maintainers + +22:35.280 --> 22:36.720 +and contributors really care + +22:36.720 --> 22:38.000 +about the users. + +22:38.000 --> 22:39.280 +There are many core maintainers + +22:39.280 --> 22:40.080 +who have been with the project + +22:40.080 --> 22:43.360 +for 10+ years, some way longer than that. + +22:43.360 --> 22:45.200 +So it shows you that + +22:45.200 --> 22:46.559 +the people who work on this project + +22:46.559 --> 22:47.600 +really care a lot, + +22:47.600 --> 22:48.640 +and they're very invested + +22:48.640 --> 22:51.120 +in making sure that it remains healthy + +22:51.120 --> 22:53.360 +for the long term. + +22:53.360 --> 22:55.440 +They also really care about ensuring + +22:55.440 --> 22:56.720 +that Emacs continues to work well + +22:56.720 --> 22:58.159 +for long-time users, + +22:58.159 --> 23:00.080 +(and some people have been using it + +23:00.080 --> 23:01.280 +for 30 to 40 years, + +23:01.280 --> 23:02.400 +which is kind of insane, + +23:02.400 --> 23:03.760 +if you think about it), + +23:03.760 --> 23:05.679 +all while gradually and sensibly + +23:05.679 --> 23:07.120 +enabling new scenarios + +23:07.120 --> 23:08.080 +and core improvements + +23:08.080 --> 23:09.280 +that benefit all of us, + +23:09.280 --> 23:11.520 +even the new and the old users. + +23:11.520 --> 23:12.880 +Keeping a piece of software + +23:12.880 --> 23:13.600 +running and relevant + +23:13.600 --> 23:14.400 +for this many years + +23:14.400 --> 23:15.440 +is a huge effort, + +23:15.440 --> 23:16.799 +so I'm very thankful + +23:16.799 --> 23:18.480 +to the maintainers of Emacs, + +23:18.480 --> 23:20.159 +and I hope all of you are as well, + +23:20.159 --> 23:22.799 +because this is kind of an anomaly + +23:22.799 --> 23:23.600 +in the software field + +23:23.600 --> 23:24.960 +to have a piece of software + +23:24.960 --> 23:26.640 +that has existed for so long, + +23:26.640 --> 23:30.000 +who has managed to survive + +23:30.000 --> 23:31.840 +despite various different types + +23:31.840 --> 23:33.280 +of platform transitions, + +23:33.280 --> 23:35.280 +operating transitions over the years + +23:35.280 --> 23:37.360 +and still thrive and be a very useful + +23:37.360 --> 23:38.559 +and very key piece of software + +23:38.559 --> 00:23:40.959 +for a lot of people. + +23:40.960 --> 23:42.320 +So aren't all these things + +23:42.320 --> 23:43.039 +that we just talked about + +23:43.039 --> 23:43.840 +supposed to come + +23:43.840 --> 23:45.279 +when an editor is popular? + +23:45.279 --> 23:46.080 +We've been talking about + +23:46.080 --> 23:47.039 +what is popularity, + +23:47.039 --> 23:48.720 +what benefits come with popularity. + +23:48.720 --> 23:50.320 +So all the things I just mentioned, + +23:50.320 --> 23:51.120 +shouldn't that be something + +23:51.120 --> 23:52.720 +that would only be for editors + +23:52.720 --> 23:54.640 +that are super popular? Well, I guess + +23:54.640 --> 23:56.720 +the answer is maybe Emacs is actually + +23:56.720 --> 23:57.840 +popular enough. + +23:57.840 --> 23:58.799 +That doesn't necessarily mean + +23:58.799 --> 24:00.640 +that we should not try to + +24:00.640 --> 24:03.600 +help other people find Emacs, + +24:03.600 --> 24:04.960 +but I think that we should not + +24:04.960 --> 24:05.760 +worry so much about + +24:05.760 --> 24:06.880 +the popularity of Emacs, + +24:06.880 --> 24:08.480 +because what we have is great, + +24:08.480 --> 24:11.120 +and we should just focus our time + +24:11.120 --> 24:13.919 +on continuing to improve the health + +24:13.919 --> 24:15.520 +of the community that we have + +24:15.520 --> 24:17.360 +and the health of the editor itself, + +24:17.360 --> 24:19.440 +and not worry too much about chasing + +24:19.440 --> 24:20.880 +whatever is happening out in the world + +24:20.880 --> 00:24:22.879 +at any given point. + +24:22.880 --> 24:26.159 +To conclude, the next time someone says + +24:26.159 --> 24:27.760 +we should do this thing + +24:27.760 --> 24:28.559 +or this other thing + +24:28.559 --> 24:30.400 +to make Emacs more popular, + +24:30.400 --> 24:32.240 +ask them these questions. + +24:32.240 --> 24:35.200 +1. What does popularity mean to you? + +24:35.200 --> 24:37.279 +2. How do you measure it? + +24:37.279 --> 24:39.440 +3. What do you think Emacs is going to + +24:39.440 --> 24:41.600 +gain from increased popularity? + +24:41.600 --> 24:43.279 +So I hope that you found this talk + +24:43.279 --> 24:44.159 +inspiring and maybe + +24:44.159 --> 24:46.320 +a little bit reassuring. Thanks so much + +24:46.320 --> 24:48.240 +for your time, and happy hacking. + +24:48.240 --> 24:50.867 +We'll see ya. + +24:50.867 --> 24:51.559 +[captions by sachac] diff --git a/2021/info/build-schedule.md b/2021/info/build-schedule.md index 5be9647f..24f3f655 100644 --- a/2021/info/build-schedule.md +++ b/2021/info/build-schedule.md @@ -1,7 +1,7 @@ <!-- Automatically generated by conf-create-info-pages --> Q&A: live -Status: Now playing +Status: Finished Duration: 16:54 diff --git a/2021/info/forever-schedule.md b/2021/info/forever-schedule.md index a8e7b336..624c88ae 100644 --- a/2021/info/forever-schedule.md +++ b/2021/info/forever-schedule.md @@ -1,13 +1,17 @@ <!-- Automatically generated by conf-create-info-pages --> Q&A: live -Status: Captions added to video +Status: Now playing Duration: 24:52 -<div class="times" start="2021-11-28T21:07:00Z" end="2021-11-28T21:32:00Z">Sunday, Nov 28 2021, ~ 4:07 PM - 4:32 PM EST<br />Sunday, Nov 28 2021, ~ 1:07 PM - 1:32 PM PST<br />Sunday, Nov 28 2021, ~ 9:07 PM - 9:32 PM UTC<br />Sunday, Nov 28 2021, ~10:07 PM - 10:32 PM CET<br />Sunday, Nov 28 2021, ~11:07 PM - 11:32 PM EET<br />Monday, Nov 29 2021, ~ 2:37 AM - 3:02 AM IST<br />Monday, Nov 29 2021, ~ 5:07 AM - 5:32 AM +08<br />Monday, Nov 29 2021, ~ 6:07 AM - 6:32 AM JST<br /><a href="/2021/">Find out how to watch and participate</a></div> -If you have questions and the speaker has not indicated public contact information on this page, please feel free to e-mail us at <emacsconf-submit@gnu.org> and we'll forward your question to the speaker. +If you have questions and the speaker has not indicated public contact information on this page, please feel free to e-mail us at <emacsconf-submit@gnu.org> and we'll forward your question to the speaker. +<div class="mainVideo"><div class="video-card vid" data-id="mainVideo"><figure><video controls preload="metadata" poster="https://media.emacsconf.org/2021/emacsconf-2021-forever--m-x-forever-why-emacs-will-outlast-text-editor-trends--david-wilson-system-crafters--main.png" id="mainVideo"> +<source src="https://media.emacsconf.org/2021/emacsconf-2021-forever--m-x-forever-why-emacs-will-outlast-text-editor-trends--david-wilson-system-crafters--main.webm"><track label="English" kind="captions" srclang="en" src="/2021/captions/emacsconf-2021-forever--m-x-forever-why-emacs-will-outlast-text-editor-trends--david-wilson-system-crafters--main.vtt" default><track kind="chapters" label="Chapters" srclang="en" src="/2021/captions/emacsconf-2021-forever--m-x-forever-why-emacs-will-outlast-text-editor-trends--david-wilson-system-crafters--chapters.vtt" default onload="displayChapters(this)"> +</video></figure> +<div class="files resources"><ul><li><a href="https://media.emacsconf.org/2021/emacsconf-2021-forever--m-x-forever-why-emacs-will-outlast-text-editor-trends--david-wilson-system-crafters--main.webm">Download .webm video (24:52, 27.6MB)</a></li><li><a href="https://media.emacsconf.org/2021/emacsconf-2021-forever--m-x-forever-why-emacs-will-outlast-text-editor-trends--david-wilson-system-crafters.org">Download .org</a></li><li><a href="https://media.emacsconf.org/2021/emacsconf-2021-forever--m-x-forever-why-emacs-will-outlast-text-editor-trends--david-wilson-system-crafters--main.vtt">Download --main.vtt</a></li><li><a href="https://media.emacsconf.org/2021/emacsconf-2021-forever--m-x-forever-why-emacs-will-outlast-text-editor-trends--david-wilson-system-crafters--chapters.vtt">Download --chapters.vtt</a></li><li><a href="https://toobnix.org/w/jSW4Gk3hsuv2ZfW8jXHz39">View on Toobnix</a></li></ul></div><ol class="chapters"></ol></div> +</div> # Description diff --git a/2021/schedule-details.md b/2021/schedule-details.md index 7e31f328..fdbfcb0c 100644 --- a/2021/schedule-details.md +++ b/2021/schedule-details.md @@ -50,8 +50,8 @@ <tr><td>done</td><td width=100>~ 2:39 PM</td><td><a href="/2021/talks/imaginary">Imaginary Programming</a></td><td>Shane Mulligan</td></tr> <tr><td>done</td><td width=100>~ 2:59 PM</td><td><a href="/2021/talks/clede">CLEDE: the Common Lisp Emacs Development Environment</a></td><td>Fermin MF</td></tr> <tr><td>done</td><td width=100>~ 3:25 PM</td><td><a href="/2021/talks/maintainers">How to help Emacs maintainers?</a></td><td>Bastien Guerry</td></tr> -<tr><td>now playing</td><td width=100>~ 3:52 PM</td><td><a href="/2021/talks/build">How to build an Emacs</a></td><td>Fermin MF</td></tr> -<tr><td>captioned</td><td width=100>~ 4:11 PM</td><td><a href="/2021/talks/forever">M-x Forever: Why Emacs will outlast text editor trends</a></td><td>David Wilson (System Crafters)</td></tr> +<tr><td>done</td><td width=100>~ 3:52 PM</td><td><a href="/2021/talks/build">How to build an Emacs</a></td><td>Fermin MF</td></tr> +<tr><td>now playing</td><td width=100>~ 4:15 PM</td><td><a href="/2021/talks/forever">M-x Forever: Why Emacs will outlast text editor trends</a></td><td>David Wilson (System Crafters)</td></tr> <tr><td></td><td width=100>~ 4:56 PM</td><td><a href="/2021/talks/day2-close">Closing remarks day 2</a></td><td></td></tr></table><div class="cancelled">Cancelled:<ul><li><a href="/2021/talks/dsl">Self-Describing Smart DSL's: The Next Magits</a> - Psionic</li> <li><a href="/2021/talks/devel">Don't write that package! or: How I learned to stop worrying and love emacs-devel</a> - Stefan Kangas</li> <li><a href="/2021/talks/rust">Extending Emacs in Rust with Dynamic Modules</a> - Tuấn-Anh Nguyễn</li> diff --git a/2021/talks/day2-close.md b/2021/talks/day2-close.md index 9735e574..cde20b42 100644 --- a/2021/talks/day2-close.md +++ b/2021/talks/day2-close.md @@ -11,7 +11,6 @@ - Prerecs have already been posted, yay! - Sorry some talks couldn't make it; we'll let you know if the speakers can still send videos, so subscribe to <emacsconf-submit@gnu.org> - - Next steps - We'd love to hear what you liked and what we can improve. Please share your conference feedback and ideas at the end of the |