On 13 Mar 2010, at 08:32, Nicolas Cellier wrote:

> 2010/3/12 keith <keith_hodges at yahoo.co.uk>:
>>
>>
>> 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.
>> regards
>> Keith
>>
>
> Keith
> What pathetic selfish statements.

Its a philosophical debate, nothing to do with selfishness.

Trunk is making an image in which innovations get absorbed and  
manually integrated into the blob.

Therefore if anyone else wants that innovation to use it in another  
context they have to reverse engineer what happened in trunk,  
therefore trunk is making work for people in other forks, which they  
will not do lightly.

For example, trunk cannot even manage to use an Installer version that  
is managed in an external repository. Now trunk development is  
apparently making work for me, to integrate things back out to  
installer's repo.

If trunk used an integration step, which loaded things from external  
repositories periodically, rather than "selfishly" keeping control of  
everything in trunk, then we might be ok.

> As it was said before, it's a matter of social organization, and from
> that POV your process was not proved better so far.



Keith