[Vm-dev] I'll come in again...

[Igor Stasenko]

On 27 June 2010 22:02, Andreas Raab <andreas.raab at gmx.de> wrote:
>
> Folks -
>
> I feel like I've been thoroughly misunderstood in the recent discussion
> about using a distributed version control system. Let me try to make my
> point as clearly as possible:
>
> First of all I don't *care* whether to use a "distributed" VCS or not. Is
> that clear? I really don't. What I care about for a version control system
> is how easy it is to use and how well it integrates with the system I use.
>
> Having been clear on the initial point, my concern in this discussion is
> about *why* people seem to be excited about using an DVCS. What I'm hearing
> is "great, now we can fork" instead of "great, this will make it easier to
> contribute".
>
> There is a difference between a "branch" and a "fork". A "branch" is
> something where you (usually temporarily) diverge from the main line in
> order to make the original product better. A "fork" is a (usually permanent)
> divergence from the main line WITHOUT the intention to make the original
> product better. For example, Cog is a branch, Pharo is a fork.
>
> Branches are *great*. Branches allow us to explore directions without
> destabilizing the main development. Forks are *terrible*. Forks split
> communities, force duplication of efforts, and split mindshare that would
> better be spent on making the system better for everyone.
>
> As a consequence, when I hear people being excited about the ability to
> "fork" I am starting to ask myself what we can do to avoid the need for
> forks. Forks don't just happen - there are events that lead up to it and I
> am trying to understand if there's something we can do to alleviate the
> perceived need for forking.
>
> I'm not trying to tell you that you *must* host your private experiments on
> Squeak.org - I am asking to find out what kind of frustration exist in our
> current development process, and what we can do to address them.
>

Say, i want to build & maintain my custom-built VM with minor tweaks.
Out of my mind: change the icon, splash image, initial window size,
build using custom set of plugins and things like that.
It is fine, when i only need these things in my corner, but when it goes to
share these things, i have a problem: i can't meaningfully share it,
without dubious sets of steps and instructions how to do it.
Does these tweaks constituting a full-blown fork? I don't think so.
Do a custom and/or highly experimental VMs constituting a new fork? I
don't think so.
It is the same as 'my custom 4.1-based image', which i want to share
with people.
So, what is wrong with that? And what harm it could do to the community?

As you said, fork is a divergence from the mainstream.
But you missing one important detail: it is always a political decision, not a
technical one.
For forking, it really doesn't matters what tools you use(d). Because
when you deciding to fork,
this is a least thing you care about, obviously, because since you
forked, you are free to choose
any other tools you might wanna use, tools that different from those
which used by mainstream.

My proposal to switch to DVCS was to make VM contribution process easier.
Easier to share developer's artifacts for review and evaluation.
Easier to track contributions and easier to integrate them to mainstream.

If results of some experiments, for some reason are not folded to mainstream,
then there are only one good reason for it: they are not accepted by
community because either
not very good or userful one.
And if looking from this point, what sense to fork then, since nobody
will use it anyways?

But completely different case, when some artifacts are not integrated,
because of technical issues
related to VM build & distribution process or they are lost and forgotten,
or there are simply not enough time for core developers to review them.
This is not acceptable, because it discourages developers from
contributing to VM and creates an
atmosphere of closed cult of high priests, which the only one who can
decide what to do and when.

> Cheers,
>  - Andreas
>



-- 
Best regards,
Igor Stasenko AKA sig.