Hi,
The thing is, I don't think these positions are consistent.
If I was trying to maximize drive by contributions I would
consider
* total popularity of language X
* popularity of language X inside GNOME
If I was optimizing for maintainability then I would
choose
* all languages to be the same (when g-g was in the same
git module)
* the language the maintainers know (now they are separate)
If I was optimizing for games *to have a maintainer* I
would
* choose games that have a maintainer
In my experience maximizing drive-by contributions is done
through engagement with interested parties, publicity, and
making the code easy to run and test.
I get patches because gnome-tweak-tool can be git cloned
and run against any version of GNOME without being
compiled/installed/run in jhbuild/etc.
To that end I see here
* decisions being made that show disinterest toward
willing maintainers (of new and existing games)
* the insistence on using a language that is not easy to
run from a git checkout (how is my vala compiler version this
week). E.g. _javascript_/python
John