[V3dot10] Release team problems; Draft Pavel

[Keith Hodges]

>
> Well , he have some strong ideas what Ralph and I don't buy.
> Read carefully the mails.
>   
Which ideas are those? I am confused.

Everything that I have developed so far, is intended to serve the 
process of development. It is intended to be flexible enough to handle 
anything the developers want to do.

Therefore I do not see how my own strong ideas as to what the 
development direction should be is relevant to that. As you know I have 
not touched 3.10 itself at all.
> Or maybe we should have several 3.10, as Keith says.
> Yours view, Keith view, Ralph view, Jerome view, etc.
>   
I never said that we should have several 3.10s.

To reiterate what I was saying. The build system supports forking so 
that for serious big changes you can (if you need to) fork off in order 
to experiment in parallel. The intention being to enable the production 
of a solution that is worthy to be included back into the main release.

If you are not able to use the build test system to experiment with big 
changes then you will never get to make any big changes, because the 
build system would only be available to build and test the mainstream 
development.

The update stream is only available for the privileged few who control 
it. So the community only gets to test and review the solutions released 
by the privileged few via the update stream. At present the alternative 
is build and test preloaded images yourself on an ad hoc basis and this 
is what everyone has been doing.

I developed another alternative, that of publishing as a build script on 
a web page. (I was pleased to see that the gjallar linux release used 
this mechanism). However my own experience showed that users still 
wanted a downloadable preloaded image.

The build system extends this enabling a preloaded image to be created 
using (in theory) any base image (not just 3.9), any build script, 
automatically testing it and serving the created image automatically.

I am only trying to open the development process up to more participants 
than the chosen few.

Examples:

I would like to see FileDirectory replaced and you cant remove something 
as big as FileDirectory without breaking a lot of things. Being able to 
work on a project such as that in parallel with the mainstream is a 
useful thing to have. Also you don't need to fork off the whole thing, 
you can just fork the bits that you are interested in.

Also I want to enable underscores in selectors, which I think is a 
really simple thing to do. Namespaces is another bone of contention. 
However the momentum and resistence to change in the community is such 
that you have to present a solution as a complete working system and let 
users play with it in order to prove that everything is going to be ok. 
The fact that the build system supports this diversification IF you wish 
to use it should not prevent the mainstream development process from 
using it.

Keith

 

	
	
		
___________________________________________________________ 
All new Yahoo! Mail "The new Interface is stunning in its simplicity and ease of use." - PC Magazine 
http://uk.docs.yahoo.com/nowyoucan.html