Hi all It seams to me reading this thread that there are those who would like to mandate the use of a given VCS on a particular host.
The primary advantages being that it makes CI so much simpler, and having a uniform workflow makes it easier for those not maintaining a given package to view and make changes (occasionally distribution wide). On the other hand there is also those who would rather not see this become mandatory. Various reasons have been given, but if I have understood correctly they boil down to a few classes namely; doesn't fit our model, a lot or work to change for few if any perceived benefit, principled belief that maintainer is free to maintain however they see fit. Personally I see no reason to mandate such a change, with policy only recommending / preferring the proposed changes. Furthermore I accept that the policy should strongly recommend (i.e. require an explanation why not) for NEW packages. Clearly, maintained packages that do not match the proposed new VCS & Layout will be harder &/OR require additional effort from people that only understand this new work flow to to work on. However these packages are being maintained by people that DO understand the existing workflows etc. Sure such packages may not 'benefit' from some of the CI testing that *may* get produced or some project wide automated changes - these tasks *may* still need to be done by the existing maintainers - that is a 'cost' of choosing not to standardise on on the proposed new system. Of cause should the package in question no longer be maintained by the exiting maintainer/team then whoever picks up the package afterwards would be free to move to the new setup as they see fit - potentially understanding better the reason that the previous maintainer chose not to adopt the new setup along the way :-) /Andy
