On Sat, Oct 06, 2012 at 12:32:37PM +0900, Daniel Juyung Seo wrote: > On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 1:32 AM, Arjan van de Ven <ar...@linux.intel.com> > wrote: > > On 10/5/2012 9:27 AM, Daniel Juyung Seo wrote: > >> On Sat, Oct 6, 2012 at 1:18 AM, Arjan van de Ven <ar...@linux.intel.com> > >> wrote: > >>> On 10/5/2012 9:11 AM, Daniel Juyung Seo wrote: > >>>> As far as I know, Kibum Kim is away and he is just a SCM guy. > >>> > >>> SCM guy ? > >> > >> Yes. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Source_Control_Management > > > > I know what SCM is thank you very much > > > > What I don't grok is why an "SCM guy" does things and not the package > > maintainer > > Sorry I don't know why either. > > > > >> He just dumped Tizen source code from Samsung internal git to public Tizen > >> git. > > > > he made a change to Tizen. > > without any useful commit message, and he replaced one component with > > another. > > > > surely there is a reason and rational for all of that? > > > > oh and he didn't dump from an internal git... there would actually be > > history and other committers if he did that. > > > > Oh maybe I am missing something. > Kibum could answer you but it looks like he is away :(
I fully agree with Arjan that history should be there. There are four points why you shouldn't never ever touch the revision history: - People working from community (be it individual or a company) want to credit of their work. Contribution is essentially a changeset in the revision history. - Single commit could be in some case a copyrightable item. - Revision history is mandatory when you want to pick upstream bug fixes into your project. Even if your project is a fork of a upstream project this is very essential thing. - Bug hunting. How you are going go git bisect? For example, if you only have kind of flow of dumps, you make fluid integration of fixes to CVEs very very hard. In my opinion, this is really an issue that should be dealt in a way or another. Dumping a strong effect to quality and also on willinges of community to contribute to a project. Just my 5 cents. I try to be constructive here :) Thanks. /Jarkko > > > > >>> > >>>> At that time, Tizen didn't keep the internal git histories which is a > >>>> bad idea. > >>> > >>> at that time? This is in August! > >>> And yes, Tizen HAD a git already at that time.... this was not the first > >>> commit at all. > >>> > >> > >> Explained above. > > > > no actually, not explained at all. > > there is never an excuse to clobber a git tree. > > > > I didn't ask you excuse. I just explained because you asked. > > > and frankly, this sort of change must be deliberate somehow! > > or are you telling me that components randomly change like this, without > > any thought or idea > > or control? That would be insane, and indicative of a Mickey Mouse project, > > not something serious. > > > > Agreed. > I also don't like that idea. > > >>> which have a last change entry of 2010. > >>> This change was done in August 2012. > >>> So these are not very useful files. > >>> (adding debian files in the commit made sense as part of the general RPM > >>> -> Debian transition that seems to be happening though) > >> > >> No Tizen is moving from deb to rpm and SBS to OBS. > >> Tizen 1.0 : deb + SBS > >> Tizen 2.0 : rpm + OBS > > > > I feel sorry for you then... sounds like a huge leap backwards. > > (as someone who has been working on Linux operating systems for 10 years... > > I can really say I feel sorry for you, > > with experience, not just compassion) > > I don't like this movement as well. But that's what happened to Tizen 2.0. > I still miss deb + SBS :( > > > > > the good news is that in the last few months, debian stuff has been added > > to, not removed from basically all packages, > > so I wonder if your statement is actually true. > > > > Oh you didn't read my link. > https://review.tizen.org/git/?p=external/bootchart.git;a=blob;f=debian/changelog;h=b7762ace8a6e14819f0a4bebcdab2e09cc6342b2;hb=30267f1d1bd18383ad0fa45d21fa00a2ed23cda9 > Read the link again and see the history and date. > The last change happened on 24 Nov 2010. There was no Tizen project in 2010. > They didn't remove debian directory yet and committed whole source > code to Tizen git. > > Sorry debian is not used in Tizen 2.0 anymore. > Don't ask me why because I don't like the move either. > > I am just helping you understand the history. I didn't decide it :( > > > > > > >>> > >>> In what architecture forum was the decision made to switch from the > >>> modern (C) bootchart to the old (java) bootchart? > >>> Were there Intel folks, or any non-Samsung folks present in that forum? > >>> What were the reasons for changing away from the modern bootchart? > >>> Is Tizen going include Java to work with this? > > > > these questions are still very very relevant, and still unanswered. > > > > > > Yes there must be a proper answer from the right person. > > Thanks. > > Daniel Juyung Seo (SeoZ) > _______________________________________________ > General mailing list > General@lists.tizen.org > https://lists.tizen.org/listinfo/general _______________________________________________ General mailing list General@lists.tizen.org https://lists.tizen.org/listinfo/general
