Fractal Development (was Re: [Vm-dev] VM Automated builds update)

[stephane ducasse]

> Distributed SCM, thrown around a lot on the list. Continuous integration is a pretty obvious win I think (if you can convince me that it isn't I'll buy you a whole case of beer.) So I'll just look at source control. 
> 
> It works for the Linux kernel. In particular, it makes it possible for a *single individual* to handle integration for the whole kernel, by farming out the detail work to "trusted lieutenants," who in turn do the same for still others. Code starts flowing all over the place, and if it's useful it usually makes it's way back up the tree. 
> 
> Does the "single individual" part scream Smalltalk at anyone else, or is it just me?
> 
> Think of it as a fractal development model wherein you have much testing and vetting at many levels before e.g. Torvalds ever sees it your commit. 
> 
> Some folks seem worried that a decentralized SCM will encourage more forks. I would maintain that forking is a social behavior, and it's unrelated to SCM.

yes because nothing prevents you do have your own local copy containing your fixes and not sharing them
> 
> I think we will always have a core of people who "own" pieces of Squeak as a consequence of some combination of meritorious conduct, passion for the technology, etc. There's no need to ditch official releases to accommodate a distributed SCM. Frankly MC is already a hair closer to Git than it is to CVS in some respects, and all the damned thing really needs to get all this goodness rolling (on a technical level anyway) is branching functionality. 
> 
> Branch+Merge != Fork
> 
> FWIW, the point is making branching and *especially* merging easier. When merging is easy, you have a force that acts *against* divergent enterprises. 

yes
> 
> How many forks are there of Squeak? Okay, now how many forks are there of the Linux kernel?
> 
> Is the orthogonality obvious yet?

sorry probably my english but I do not get what you want to say.
Now I agree with the answer of igor.