Return-Path: Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org via listexpand id ; Sun, 9 Mar 2003 12:11:05 -0500 Received: (majordomo@vger.kernel.org) by vger.kernel.org id ; Sun, 9 Mar 2003 12:11:05 -0500 Received: from dsl081-067-005.sfo1.dsl.speakeasy.net ([64.81.67.5]:17806 "EHLO renegade") by vger.kernel.org with ESMTP id ; Sun, 9 Mar 2003 12:11:00 -0500 Date: Sun, 9 Mar 2003 09:20:45 -0800 From: Zack Brown To: "Martin J. Bligh" Cc: Roman Zippel , "Eric W. Biederman" , Linus Torvalds , Larry McVoy , linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Subject: Re: BitBucket: GPL-ed KitBeeper clone Message-ID: <20030309172045.GP4170@renegade> References: <8200000.1047228943@[10.10.2.4]> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <8200000.1047228943@[10.10.2.4]> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.3i Sender: linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org X-Mailing-List: linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org Content-Length: 2016 Lines: 47 On Sun, Mar 09, 2003 at 08:55:44AM -0800, Martin J. Bligh wrote: > I think it's possible to get 90% of the functionality that most of us > (or at least I) want without the distributed stuff. If that's 10% of > the effort, would be really nice to have the auto-merging type of > functionality at least. > If I'm missing something fundamental here, it wouldn't suprise me ;-) I think the fundamental thing you're missing is that Linus doesn't want it. ;-) As long as people keep trying to avoid the hard problems that Linus and Larry keep pointing out, I doubt any effort will get very far. I see a lot of cases where someone says, "yeah, but we can side-step that problem if we do x, y, or z." That doesn't help. The question is, what are the actual features required for a version control system that could win support among the top kernel developers? People in the know hint at these features ("naming is really important"), but the details are apparently complicated enough that no one wants to sit down and actually describe them. They just hint at the *sort* of problems they are, and then someone says, "but that's not really a problem because of x, y, or z that can be done instead." Then people get sidetracked on the features they personally would settle for, and the real point gets lost in the fog. Or else they start dreaming about what the perfect system would be like, describing features that would not actually be required for a kernel-ready version control system. Unless the people in the know actually speak up, the rest of us just won't be able to figure out what they need. A lot of projects are chasing their tails right now, trying to do something, but lacking the direction they need in order to do it. Be well, Zack > > M. -- Zack Brown - To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/