Paul Moore wrote:
2008/11/5 David Ripton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
All timings very approximate:
Time for average user to check out Python sources with bzr: 10 minutes
Time for average user to check out Python sources with git or hg: 1 minute
Time for average user's trivial patch to be reviewed and committed: 1 year
I love DVCS as much as the next guy, but checkout time is so not the
bottleneck for this use case.
:-) That's a fair point. But it's not the point I was trying to make,
which is that I'd want whatever DVCS is chosen to make the initial
experience of a casual user / newcomer as easy as possible. Why
discourage them in the first 10 minutes (which, BTW, is much faster
than my experience with bzr last time I tried the Python repo) when we
can make them suffer for a whole year? :-) :-)
It does get to the point that the current bottleneck is code review, to
the point that people may not submit patches because it seems nearly
useless*. And often, when a patch does get reviewed, the diff is
obsolete and needs to be redone versus the changed 'current' trunk. I
presume that patches as branches would alleviate this last part.
So I think easier review should be a prime consideration for
infrastructure improvement. If I go to the tracker now and click on a
'patch', I get a sometime easy, usually difficult, and sometimes
impossible to read diff. With a wide-screen monitor, I would like a
side-by-side display with differences marked, as with Guido's code
review tool and other such displays I have seen here and there.
*The current quick review and implementation of doc suggestions and
patches, on the other hand, has encouraged more submissions from me and,
I believe, others.
_______________________________________________
Python-Dev mailing list
Python-Dev@python.org
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-dev
Unsubscribe:
http://mail.python.org/mailman/options/python-dev/archive%40mail-archive.com
