* Christoph Hellwig: >> Greg Hudson contributes an interesting viewpoint: >> >> <http://web.mit.edu/ghudson/thoughts/bitkeeper.whynot> > > It's completely unfounded bullshit. Whether you prefer a pyramid > or lots of commiters style organization is pretty much a personal > or rather community organizational issue. Both have their up- > and downsides.
Of course, but if I look at Linux release management (which is still somewhat problematic, as countless vendor-specific patches can attest) and cursory pre-integration peer review, I think he has a point. Is there *any* large project using a pyramid model and produces regular, high-quality releases which are used mostly unchanged by distributors? > All the actual arguments he presents are totally unfounded, abd > besides that bitkeeper as the specific SCM he mentions supports > multiple commiters style development just fine - for bkbits.net > projects for example you can add multiple ssh keys and thus let > different people push to the same repository. The BK-specific criticism is the less interesting part, and Greg himself mentions that BK can support centralized development. His remarks on the pyramid model are the relevant part. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]