| 1 |
On 24 May 2012 08:32, Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote: |
| 2 |
> |
| 3 |
> Sure. The slow commit rate encourages careful deliberation before |
| 4 |
> hitting the enter key, which therefore improves quality. |
| 5 |
> |
| 6 |
> Then, if you do make a mistake the slow commit rate means that fixing |
| 7 |
> that mistake can take a long time, which increases the amount of pain |
| 8 |
> our end-users run into due to the mistake, which leads to lots of |
| 9 |
> flame wars on -dev. That means that the guy who made the mistake is |
| 10 |
> subjected to more public ridicule, and is less likely to do it again, |
| 11 |
> That improves quality too. |
| 12 |
> |
| 13 |
> Since cvs doesn't tie together tree-wide changes in a nice way or |
| 14 |
> allow them to be transactionally completed, individual package |
| 15 |
> maintainers don't need to be as concerned with the big picture view. |
| 16 |
> Now as the maintainer of libfoo the fact that somebody changed my |
| 17 |
> ebuild without making a corresponding change in some profile is |
| 18 |
> completely hidden from me, and I can go to sleep peacefully without |
| 19 |
> realizing that my users are all going to have horribly broken systems |
| 20 |
> in the morning. Blissful ignorance of end-user suffering improves |
| 21 |
> developer morale, and helps get rid of pesky users at the same time. |
| 22 |
> |
| 23 |
> cvs also makes more more aware of what is going on around me. Anytime |
| 24 |
> I want to work on something in parallel with the main development |
| 25 |
> branch I get to manually merge changes in, which keeps me aware of my |
| 26 |
> place in the world. That means that I'm less likely to build nice new |
| 27 |
> features, which means fewer bugs, which improves quality, and may even |
| 28 |
> drive away users as an added bonus! |
| 29 |
> |
| 30 |
> See, cvs is really the wave of the future! |
| 31 |
> |
| 32 |
> Rich |
| 33 |
> |
| 34 |
|
| 35 |
|
| 36 |
<meta name="sarcasm" value="on" /> |
| 37 |
|
| 38 |
This CVS stuff sounds a bit too uppity and unstable to me, sounds like |
| 39 |
we should go back to the tried and true code collaboration by |
| 40 |
date-stamped tarballs of the tree which are centralised once a week to |
| 41 |
a master tarball. |
| 42 |
|
| 43 |
|
| 44 |
|
| 45 |
-- |
| 46 |
Kent |
| 47 |
|
| 48 |
perl -e "print substr( \"edrgmaM SPA NOcomil.ic\\@tfrken\", \$_ * 3, |
| 49 |
3 ) for ( 9,8,0,7,1,6,5,4,3,2 );" |
| 50 |
|
| 51 |
http://kent-fredric.fox.geek.nz |
Archives