Oops, the discussion was not directly related to what I was talking about. My apologies.. (should always read the thread first and not answer to a random mail). And sorry for the typos..
/Jarkko On Sat, Oct 06, 2012 at 12:09:30PM +0300, Jarkko Sakkinen wrote: > 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
