www-community mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Santiago Gala <santiago.g...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: "Forking is a Feature" reactions?
Date Wed, 15 Sep 2010 09:45:54 GMT
On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 8:04 AM, Dirk-Willem van Gulik
<dirkx@webweaving.org> wrote:
> On 13 Sep 2010, at 19:29, Ben Hyde wrote:
>> On Sep 13, 2010, at 7:37 AM, Sam Ruby wrote:
>>> I just can't resist the opportunity to fork this discussion:
>>> http://intertwingly.net/blog/2010/09/13/One-True-Way
>> tee hee
>> have we pushed the apache way pages to git hub yet?
> That would be a complex message :)
> While github itself - and its ecosystem/people interaction is really interesting and
innovative* - the associated  habits around 'git' are not always. Or rather - its conductive
ness to having large pseudo branches (really just large patches batched up some what) is not.
> Especially as the pattern seems to be conductive to personal gratification** more than
community; and leads to patchcollections which are the work of love of a single person quite
easily. And that seems to cause fragmentation on an end to end level. I.e. rather than scratching
your own itch - and solving it at a product level - you create a small alternate reality in
which you nullify the issue, in which you isolate - and then welcome people on your island
- but you've not made the world a slightly easier place. Somehow it feels as if there is some
driver lacking, some positive need to have communities collaborate.
> I am quite worried (and in equal parts intrigued) whether we're creating a new type of
entropy with a different type of 'bit rot'.

What makes you think that without github people effectively tries to
get patches "upstream"? IMO, most of may patches have remained forever
in my HD until I deleted or a crash destroyed them.

Github puts a *public* **indexable** fork one click away. It gives you
a backup, so that there is incentive to have all your microchanges up

The work of picking up valuable patches from draft changes or even
stupid ones remains in who is going to obtain value from them, i.e.,
the integrator. A number of times I have kept my patch and applied it
to a custom package for years because the process to get it into
upstream was too draining on my energy. With github at least people
can find it via google, or I can refer to people contacting me to it
years after the fact...

The fragmentation that you appreciate in github is so because you can
see it. We have the same fragmentation, only it is hidden in private
working copies across the world. IMO, the main differente between
distributed and centralized SCM is that centralized SCM people views
my work as "dirty" working copy, while distributed SCM people views it
as commits pending integration in my repository...

BTW, on an unrelated subject: what was going on in the development of
the Apache httpd server the week before 2001-9-11, i.e. 2001-9-03
through 10? Yes, I mean the week before 9/11 I'm doing some statistics
about OS projects, and this week is an outlier re: relation between
commits and list traffic for the httpd server. Any clue?


> Dw.
> *: though lack some of the (i)CLA cleanness which is troubling me.
> **: speaking purely from what drives me personally to put stuff there - along with the
avoidance of having to collaborate with people to spare/save energy - making me care more
about my code - as opposed to a product for society.
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org

To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscribe@apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: community-help@apache.org

View raw message