On Thu, May 1, 2008 at 8:05 AM, Martijn Dashorst <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 5/1/08, Matthieu Riou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > As far as I can tell, Assaf is not proposing to migrate away from the > SVN > > central server, just offering an easy solution for people who'd want to > do > > some experimental developments. What could be wrong with that? AFAICT > it's > > definitely a best practice in open source. > > I'm not keen to restart the git discussion again. Using a DSCM is > according to a lot of folks within the foundation antithetical to the > Apache Way. There are others who claim that this Apache Way is based > too much on the svn workflow. In either case: git is not supported, > nor will it be anytime this decade for Apache development. > Seems to me that you're generalizing the "we stick with SVN" opinion to "dSCM is always evil". Am I not free anymore to use whatever I want to develop on my machine? > > In any case, experimentation should be ok. But I do think taking baby > steps in this regards is wise, especially when a lot of incubator > folks are really allergic to git and the Linus style of development. > Since the incubator has a final say in whether a podling 'gets the > Apache Way', ensuring their happiness is really important. I'm not > sure whether or not this will become an issue upon graduation, but my > advise is to really take it slow with these kinds of experiments. > I tend to agree with you. But sometimes being overly conservative leads to sclerosis. There's a balance to find here. > > Also note that the incubator folks have vast experience in creating > successful Apache communities. So don't take it lightly when they > frown upon distributed scm's in podlings. > Again, I haven't seen indicated anywhere that Buildr developers wouldn't be committing in SVN anymore. It actually seems to me that the commit flow is pretty good. > > IMO, forking really is against the Apache Way, which has nothing to do > with a particular workflow, but because it doesn't foster a community > driven development practice. Development within Apache must take place > in the open, on the mailing lists, through a central repository. > Forking goes against that principle. > The freedom to fork (the code, not the community) is one of the core values of open source and the Apache license is extremely forking friendly. Of course it's better if things happen in a single and strong community but if someone wants to take buildr, extend it to support their own proprietary repository structure and distribute it under whatever license they see fit, then so be it. It's good for buildr and it's good for them. Cheers, Matthieu > > Martijn >
