Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-river-dev-archive@locus.apache.org Received: (qmail 70640 invoked from network); 22 Dec 2008 21:36:40 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.2) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 22 Dec 2008 21:36:40 -0000 Received: (qmail 19293 invoked by uid 500); 22 Dec 2008 21:36:40 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-river-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 19277 invoked by uid 500); 22 Dec 2008 21:36:40 -0000 Mailing-List: contact river-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: river-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list river-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 19266 invoked by uid 99); 22 Dec 2008 21:36:40 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 22 Dec 2008 13:36:40 -0800 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.2 required=10.0 tests=SPF_NEUTRAL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (nike.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [213.148.129.14] (HELO mx01.qsc.de) (213.148.129.14) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 22 Dec 2008 21:36:31 +0000 Received: from tux.wizards.de (port-87-234-136-62.dynamic.qsc.de [87.234.136.62]) by mx01.qsc.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1E2683CAD1 for ; Mon, 22 Dec 2008 22:36:08 +0100 (CET) Received: from [192.168.100.128] (hho.wizards.de [192.168.100.128]) by tux.wizards.de (Postfix) with ESMTP id B3D48CECA7 for ; Mon, 22 Dec 2008 22:36:06 +0100 (CET) Message-ID: <49500846.4030400@wizards.de> Date: Mon, 22 Dec 2008 22:36:06 +0100 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Holger_Hoffst=E4tte?= User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.18 (Windows/20081105) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: river-dev@incubator.apache.org Subject: Re: Screw "the future". References: <49414747.4070701@wizards.de> In-Reply-To: X-Enigmail-Version: 0.95.7 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org Robert Burrell Donkin wrote: >> I will not mention the consequences of a centralized scm very >> intentionally. (: > > blaming the version control system is easy but misguilded "very intentionally" meant it would have been anything but misguided. I hope you're not suggesting that the implications of a dev process or tool choice are negligible. > the apache development model is canonical, which determines the choice > of version control system. ..and that is exactly the fallacy that I did not want to expand on. And still don't want to, either (at least not here). > this choice of model is both philosophical > and practical. I never disputed that, either. :) > the apache software license is not reciprical and so > this means that contributions can only be accepted with oversight and > due legal process. only one version of the code will be approved for > release by the PMC as a canonically numbered version. All that makes sense, and for good reasons. It does not in any way contradict my observations. regards Holger PS: for those wondering about the potentially offensive subject line - there was supposed to be a "let's fix the present" that went missing. sorry about that.