On 07.08.17 17:51, Oliver Bock wrote: > On 07.08.2017 16:21, Steffen Möller wrote: >> So, please find a way to stop this so very outdated discussion. > This discussion is meant to help reaching a consensus on how to do > things in the future - the very things you asked for. Only when one > established the how one can establish the who. I apologize for the confusion I seem to have caused. I am with you, as you know. Here a somewhat more frank rewrite of what I had meant to say:
People on this thread take one of two positions: a) have it the way we always had it in BOINC, mostly in ignorance of what git could do for BOINC b) have it the same way that git is used in any other larger Open Source project More discussions in this thread do more harm than good in my experience, hence my urgent request to stop it. Come to an agreement, which must be b) for BOINC to survive, or fork and have it like b). But, please, by all means, stop discussing where there is not much to discuss. Nobody will voluntarily change behaviors because of an email thread. One needs to experience first hand how a different development model works to learn from that. > >> Heck, the >> git-creator-Linus' Linux kernel just gives a very nice model of how it >> can be done once it gets any complicated > Right, and it has been part of this discussion. > >> No need to outsmart them. > Outsmart? The kernel folks? As you know, we haven't even established the > bare bones yet. Where do we try to outsmart anyone? Missunderstanding. "you" as in a) (the current git routine in BOINC) are trying to do something different than the git-routine of b) for no particular reason. I hope to have clarified my position and that it is perceived as a constructive contribution. Steffen _______________________________________________ boinc_dev mailing list boinc_dev@ssl.berkeley.edu https://lists.ssl.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/boinc_dev To unsubscribe, visit the above URL and (near bottom of page) enter your email address.
