> On 03 Dec 2014, at 08:21, stepharo <steph...@free.fr> wrote: > > > Le 2/12/14 21:02, kilon alios a écrit : >> I think its great that we have this discussion we need at least people to >> report any problems they have with the git integration , real problems not >> theoretical problems so as a community we can coordinate effort. There is no >> reason to speculate about the future of Pharo with git since the integration >> is in a very early stage and we have still a long way to go . I am following >> the discussion with great interest. >> >> What fascinates me about git is that is made around the idea of modular >> community. Its architecture makes it flexible to send code around and create >> a community of commits that bounce without a need for centralisation. You >> could say that each pull request is a message and I feel that git >> architecture could fit like a glove for Pharo because they speak the same >> language. > > Monticello is like that too. > A decentralized version management system
yes, but is a decentralised management system in a way that does not scales in team work (not a problem of monticello, all cms of the time had same problem). They are ok with centralised ways of work (even if decentralised systems): all responsibility is in contributor, so you end having to centralise access rights (this is ok for lots of people, but welll… not in open source models that wants to grow from “just some contributors”). The real advantage of git is the model it allows: you have a repository that everybody can fork and when ready, they can do a pull request… then responsible can choose to merge or not, or cherry pick, or whatever. In summary: is a lot more dynamic and allows a lot more people contribution. monticello is cool, but is not good for that. and if we put also in the table that we need to spend a lot of time improving *external tools* (like smalltalkhub) just to have something that is way far from what is “state of the art”, then the equation starts to be less and less in our favor. Also, the proposal so far is not to drop what we have, but to adapt it to be able to use what is around… would be the best of two worlds if you want (even if I believe at the end we will converge in just one). Esteban > >> >> Obviously there is still a long road ahead of us but I am excited and >> believe that slowly people will contribute and in the future we will look >> back and wonder what tooks us so long to embrace git :D > >
