labs-labs mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Santiago Gala <>
Subject Re: Subject: Re: Lab for distributed SCM?
Date Sat, 23 Feb 2008 12:05:37 GMT

El vie, 22-02-2008 a las 17:46 -0800, Joe Schaefer escribió:
> If people want to experiment with using git-svn or
> svk or anything else, and there's something about
> our infrastructure which prevents that, you need
> only talk to infrastructure about it to see if it
> can be resolved.  In most cases it can, rather easily.

I think having a closed list is a big part of the problem. In "normal"
projects the only list that is not public is purposely called private.
The only exceptions are a few sensitive lists (one or two per
committee/project) ... and *all* the infrastructure ones.

I don't think this makes sense, specially as there is already one
specifically named "private".

El sáb, 23-02-2008 a las 10:37 +0100, Mads Toftum escribió:
> On Fri, Feb 22, 2008 at 09:39:17PM -0800, Matthieu Riou wrote:
> > OpenSolaris is failing with Git but I'm not sure it's fair to put the fault
> > on gSCMs, it's Sun's management that's at fault. OpenOffice has similar
> > issues with CVS. For that matter there are quite a few scripts on SVN to
> > maintain vendor branches (aka forks).
> > 
> Opensolaris uses Mercurial, not git. They spent very long time testing
> git, mercurial and many other options. They did some very thorough
> testing and comparison to reach that result.
> I think Mercurial works perfectly well for the kind of development they
> want to do (any "failings" are due to  politics/legal, not the tool).
> Just as well as I'm sure git does what it's supposed to for the linux
> "benevolent dictatorship" model. But neither of those models are what
> the ASF stands for and I'm very strongly opposed to providing tools and
> support to those who wish to deviate from our model of community based
> development.

There is a lot of tagging in the previous paragraph (mercurial -> good
for opensolaris; git -> linux; none -> ASF). More tagging: dSCM in the
ASF -> "those who wish to deviate".

"deviate"? I hope it is in the sense of "aberrant: markedly different
from an accepted norm" and not in the "pervert: a person whose behavior
deviates from what is acceptable especially in sexual behavior". I guess
I can take the first meaning. But it implies authoritarian thinking, as
there needs to be a "norm" to judge against.

As I was saying, a lot of tagging and not a single line of logical
reasoning. The discourse ends up like: "you are not one of us: go away".
This is all the meaning I can extract. I *am* member of the ASF. I won't
go away or shut up so easily. Specially when insulted. I tend to keep
the proportion, and return approximately the same level that I get.
Please tell me if I haven't this time.

> I completely agree with Roy that distributed SCM isn't for us and I
> agree with Paul that labs isn't the place. On a personal note as part of
> the infrastructure team, I'm also rather disappointed at the actions of
> some of the people who are trying to force their world view in through
> the backdoor and yet there's been not one single mail on the topic going
> to any of the infrastructure lists.

You can have the opinion that suits you more. At least Roy has treated
to convince other people, you are just trying to scare us.

Again: "force their world view in"... this is authoritarian discourse.
The "official" reaction to people asking for different tools has been
exactly this: forcing the established world view using tools. I seem to
recall that the ASF was a "loosely connected group of projects with a
legal umbrella". This world view used to be kosher. What has happened to

Re: the lists, I already said this to Joe: I don't think we need more
private lists. I don't think research like this one needs, benefits or
even wants a closed environment.

If the lab is started, it won't be oriented to "force their world view
in through the backdoor", no need for it. The market is speaking about
this: anybody exposed to different open source project is already
exposed to git, bazaar, darcs and mercurial. I needed to install those
in the last 2 years due to different projects, and in this order. I
found them better tools than subversion. Should I refrain from being a
deviate (i.e., be a conformist) and stay silent?


> vh
> Mads Toftum
Santiago Gala

To unsubscribe, e-mail:
For additional commands, e-mail:

View raw message