Gentoo Archives: gentoo-dev

From: Kent Fredric <kentfredric@×××××.com>
To: gentoo-dev@l.g.o
Subject: Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver
Date: Thu, 24 May 2012 10:09:50
In Reply to: Re: [gentoo-dev] Portage Git migration - clean cut or git-cvsserver by Rich Freeman
On 24 May 2012 08:32, Rich Freeman <rich0@g.o> wrote:
> > Sure.  The slow commit rate encourages careful deliberation before > hitting the enter key, which therefore improves quality. > > Then, if you do make a mistake the slow commit rate means that fixing > that mistake can take a long time, which increases the amount of pain > our end-users run into due to the mistake, which leads to lots of > flame wars on -dev.  That means that the guy who made the mistake is > subjected to more public ridicule, and is less likely to do it again, > That improves quality too. > > Since cvs doesn't tie together tree-wide changes in a nice way or > allow them to be transactionally completed, individual package > maintainers don't need to be as concerned with the big picture view. > Now as the maintainer of libfoo the fact that somebody changed my > ebuild without making a corresponding change in some profile is > completely hidden from me, and I can go to sleep peacefully without > realizing that my users are all going to have horribly broken systems > in the morning.  Blissful ignorance of end-user suffering improves > developer morale, and helps get rid of pesky users at the same time. > > cvs also makes more more aware of what is going on around me.  Anytime > I want to work on something in parallel with the main development > branch I get to manually merge changes in, which keeps me aware of my > place in the world.  That means that I'm less likely to build nice new > features, which means fewer bugs, which improves quality, and may even > drive away users as an added bonus! > > See, cvs is really the wave of the future! > > Rich >
<meta name="sarcasm" value="on" /> This CVS stuff sounds a bit too uppity and unstable to me, sounds like we should go back to the tried and true code collaboration by date-stamped tarballs of the tree which are centralised once a week to a master tarball. -- Kent perl -e  "print substr( \"edrgmaM  SPA NOcomil.ic\\@tfrken\", \$_ * 3, 3 ) for ( 9,8,0,7,1,6,5,4,3,2 );"