From protest to proposal (Was: Re: [squeak-dev] [Election] ...is soon
upon us! Last day info)
siguctua at gmail.com
Fri Mar 12 23:28:38 UTC 2010
trunk process is not a silver bullet.
You should think in a way how to sell your ideas, instead of keep
Telling that trunk is bad, doesn't makes your ideas better.
If you want to propose an evolutionary path, with easy migration of
trunk-alike process to something else,
which removes some (or most) of its shortcomings, please do so.
For example. You presented some ideas lately.
I read it briefly, and i don't feel much convinced that it would be
cool to use it.
First, you introducing a dependency from external tools, like bazaar ,
and using a file system for organizing the source code.
Next, from your description, i see there are many technical
details/moves in order to get into the field and start playing.
What i would prefer is as simple, as trunk offers:
- push that button (or file-in that code) and you're in
A simplicity, as to me, is a key here. We should evolve gradually
making a simple steps one after another. So, there will be no too much
oppression from community, because if we do things right, its easy to
understand where improvement lies and at each step
we could analyze and then decide what next step should be and in what direction.
But if you making too big steps, expect that there's many who can't
cope up with you , and hence will refuse to follow your path, simply
because it is uncertain for them what will be direct benefits, because
you trying to sell a swiss-knife as a screwdriver.
On 13 March 2010 00:32, keith <keith_hodges at yahoo.co.uk> wrote:
> I don't insist that my way will be better.
> Come on now, the majority of what you write is to insist that your way will
> be better.
> Not at all, I have two main points... 1) the board has no constitution, and
> 2) trunk is the worst possible process you could have chosen, because
> a) it isn't a process it is an excuse to group-hack a monolithic image
> b) the philosophy behind trunk is the opposite of where we want to go,
> monolithic vs support all forks with a kernel you can build on.
> c) moving targets are the worst possible scenario.
> d) it uses tools that are too high level.
> e) it is release a year rather then release a month
> f) it relies on an elite to manage it
> g) it closes out people who cant change things without breaking it.
> You keep using trunk, and you close me out.
> So far there has been one useful contributor to trunk, and that was when
> Torsten posted a changeset to this list, and I used it.
> The fact that I can knock up a brand new process in less than a week which
> is better than trunk, simply shows how bad it is.
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.
More information about the Squeak-dev