On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 5:23 PM, Joe Schaefer <joe_schae...@yahoo.com> wrote: (...) > It does give me pause because I believe there's an important role for a > set of central services for projects (and for societies in general). As > far as Apache goes, it's a virtual organization whose roots lie in the > stuff we have stored in various datacenters. Nevertheless there is a > palpable sense of what it means to "do work at Apache", and part of that > illusion is provided by our centralization. I do wonder how we'd manage > to maintain that illusion if we completely decentralized our core workflows. >
It is amazing how you (and I mean a big y'all of people negating distributed SCM along those last 5 years or so) can keep the illusion that a technical solution (called "centralization" here) can keep an organization together more than a set of core values can. While I agree that changing tools, like changing stylesheets or electing a new board, changes an organization, I don't believe at all in "subversion" or even in "centralized SCM" as a shared ASF value. The license, the belief in collective decision making, our history, etc. are central. Not the technology we use for SCM. We already changed from cvs to svn and our world stayed reasonably similar. I see the "dscm is an unsuitable workflow for collaborative development" meme as this: a meme. You can think of git as just a local backup for your changes and a tool for patch handing like quilt blended together. This is often how I think about it when I'm using "git svn" for legacy subversion sites like the ASF. If you add github for a public remote backup this would be similar to having a quilt setup exported as a public share in one of those cloud backups... only with standardized and very efficient transfers Regards Santiago --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: community-unsubscr...@apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: community-h...@apache.org
