Re: ASF Subversion version
Den mån 13 dec. 2021 kl 20:26 skrev Luke Mauldin : > Thank you for the information. I am hopeful that one of the outcomes the > log4j situation is that ASF project funding would be increased but I > suspect that thinking is naive. Companies have little incentive to invest > in something that “works well enough”. I too work for a company that has > substantial subversion usage but will not support any development on it. > We are a bit of a unique situation because we have a monorepo with 30-40 > different subprojects and the different subprojects have files with the > same name (go.mod, cargo.toml, some .hcl files and some others) that have > very similar or identical content. Originally we had that repo in git but > the combination of so many identically named files with similar/identical > content really messed with things like “git log —follow” and generally the > file level tracking of git since of course git just cares about the > tree/blobs and not the files. We ran tests and subversion 1.14 handled > those scenarios substantially better than git since subversion does track > files. We investigated fossil but it seems to be mostly driven by one > person and doesn’t have even the subversion level of community support. > I hope that subversion continues to be around and thrive for a long time > because even though git “won” the vcs war, I think that subversion does > still have some advantages in a centralized corporate environment. > ASF is depending on fundraising and it isn't overly rich. FY19 showed a net profit of 329 k$ while FY20 showed a net loss of 277 k$. There is enough money to run the foundation for a year, *maybe* two if funding dried up. That is not exactly a situation to employ paid developers. I'm also afraid that Subversion would not be the first project in the queue. But I would be glad to be proven wrong and see a big corporate sponsor showing up with donations earmarked just for Subversion. In the meantime we all should do what we can and, as Nathan already wrote, every bit counts. Our company use Subversion professionally, but as end users so I can't give my boss a business case to allocate much developer resources, however we are using a commercially licensed server (from one of the companies who from time to time show up in the mailing lists and in the "commits" archive). I'm stealing a few unused cycles to help on the mailing lists and I'm also using a few hours of my free time to look at the code to (hopefully) learn a few skills that will make me a better developer. Kind regards, Daniel
Re: ASF Subversion version
Thank you for the information. I am hopeful that one of the outcomes the log4j situation is that ASF project funding would be increased but I suspect that thinking is naive. Companies have little incentive to invest in something that “works well enough”. I too work for a company that has substantial subversion usage but will not support any development on it. We are a bit of a unique situation because we have a monorepo with 30-40 different subprojects and the different subprojects have files with the same name (go.mod, cargo.toml, some .hcl files and some others) that have very similar or identical content. Originally we had that repo in git but the combination of so many identically named files with similar/identical content really messed with things like “git log —follow” and generally the file level tracking of git since of course git just cares about the tree/blobs and not the files. We ran tests and subversion 1.14 handled those scenarios substantially better than git since subversion does track files. We investigated fossil but it seems to be mostly driven by one person and doesn’t have even the subversion level of community support. I hope that subversion continues to be around and thrive for a long time because even though git “won” the vcs war, I think that subversion does still have some advantages in a centralized corporate environment. > On Dec 13, 2021, at 10:24 AM, Nathan Hartman wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 10:37 AM Stefan Sperling wrote: >> >>> On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 07:14:46AM -0600, Luke Mauldin wrote: >>> It looks like the stashing functionality is still experimental. Do you >>> think there will be more funding in the future to complete it or do you >>> think it may remain unfinished for a long period of time? >>> >> >> I do not know any specifics about the funding arragements that were >> made for the staging feature. What I do know is what anyone can tell >> from public records such as our mailing list archives and in our commit >> history. Julian, like many others, is working in other jobs nowadays and >> has not actively contributed much to SVN during the last year or so. >> >> I suspect there are still some developers who would be open to the idea >> of returning to continue working on in-progress features if they could >> put food on the table in return. A simple fact is that any altruism >> these people have spent over years in order to provide this tool to >> communities and companies has largely run dry by now. While SVN grew >> up because many of its developers were on paid time since 2000, many >> were also willing to invest some of their free time to help out because >> this was a fun and challenging project to work on. >> >> But not many can afford to do such work in their free time forever, given >> the complexity of the subject matter, the expectations of quality that >> need to be met, and the fact that most users are now businesses which >> simply use SVN because it does not cost them a cent compared to similar >> proprietary offerings which are usually very expensive. I know this >> because over the course of about a decade I have helped many such >> companies move over to SVN from such platforms, and SVN works so well >> for many of them that most do not even see a need for a paid support >> contract to get help in case things go wrong. I have seen people in >> companies who wanted to pitch such things to their bosses but found >> themselves in a difficult spot when trying to justify a budget for >> SVN tooling ("wait, did we not just got rid of ClearCase in order >> to save such costs...?") >> >> And naturally, the longer people have moved on with their lives, >> the less interest they will have in returning to past projects. > > > That leaves us as a community-driven project, and while I agree that > the codebase is complex and quality matters (hey, we all keep crucial > information in this thing!) that should not be a deterrent to anyone > interested in getting involved. > > We have a gigantic pool of users worldwide who depend on Subversion > and for whom other software isn't the right fit, and we need help with > many different skill areas besides coding, including translations, > documentation, testing, improving the website, bug triaging, etc., > etc. Every little bit of help from each person counts and benefits > everyone, and if each person did just a little bit, it would make a > huge difference. It's like everyone putting a flower pot on their > windowsill. Soon the whole city looks nicer. > > Cheers, > Nathan
Re: ASF Subversion version
On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 10:37 AM Stefan Sperling wrote: > > On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 07:14:46AM -0600, Luke Mauldin wrote: > > It looks like the stashing functionality is still experimental. Do you > > think there will be more funding in the future to complete it or do you > > think it may remain unfinished for a long period of time? > > > > I do not know any specifics about the funding arragements that were > made for the staging feature. What I do know is what anyone can tell > from public records such as our mailing list archives and in our commit > history. Julian, like many others, is working in other jobs nowadays and > has not actively contributed much to SVN during the last year or so. > > I suspect there are still some developers who would be open to the idea > of returning to continue working on in-progress features if they could > put food on the table in return. A simple fact is that any altruism > these people have spent over years in order to provide this tool to > communities and companies has largely run dry by now. While SVN grew > up because many of its developers were on paid time since 2000, many > were also willing to invest some of their free time to help out because > this was a fun and challenging project to work on. > > But not many can afford to do such work in their free time forever, given > the complexity of the subject matter, the expectations of quality that > need to be met, and the fact that most users are now businesses which > simply use SVN because it does not cost them a cent compared to similar > proprietary offerings which are usually very expensive. I know this > because over the course of about a decade I have helped many such > companies move over to SVN from such platforms, and SVN works so well > for many of them that most do not even see a need for a paid support > contract to get help in case things go wrong. I have seen people in > companies who wanted to pitch such things to their bosses but found > themselves in a difficult spot when trying to justify a budget for > SVN tooling ("wait, did we not just got rid of ClearCase in order > to save such costs...?") > > And naturally, the longer people have moved on with their lives, > the less interest they will have in returning to past projects. That leaves us as a community-driven project, and while I agree that the codebase is complex and quality matters (hey, we all keep crucial information in this thing!) that should not be a deterrent to anyone interested in getting involved. We have a gigantic pool of users worldwide who depend on Subversion and for whom other software isn't the right fit, and we need help with many different skill areas besides coding, including translations, documentation, testing, improving the website, bug triaging, etc., etc. Every little bit of help from each person counts and benefits everyone, and if each person did just a little bit, it would make a huge difference. It's like everyone putting a flower pot on their windowsill. Soon the whole city looks nicer. Cheers, Nathan
Re: ASF Subversion version
On Mon, Dec 13, 2021 at 07:14:46AM -0600, Luke Mauldin wrote: > It looks like the stashing functionality is still experimental. Do you think > there will be more funding in the future to complete it or do you think it > may remain unfinished for a long period of time? > I do not know any specifics about the funding arragements that were made for the staging feature. What I do know is what anyone can tell from public records such as our mailing list archives and in our commit history. Julian, like many others, is working in other jobs nowadays and has not actively contributed much to SVN during the last year or so. I suspect there are still some developers who would be open to the idea of returning to continue working on in-progress features if they could put food on the table in return. A simple fact is that any altruism these people have spent over years in order to provide this tool to communities and companies has largely run dry by now. While SVN grew up because many of its developers were on paid time since 2000, many were also willing to invest some of their free time to help out because this was a fun and challenging project to work on. But not many can afford to do such work in their free time forever, given the complexity of the subject matter, the expectations of quality that need to be met, and the fact that most users are now businesses which simply use SVN because it does not cost them a cent compared to similar proprietary offerings which are usually very expensive. I know this because over the course of about a decade I have helped many such companies move over to SVN from such platforms, and SVN works so well for many of them that most do not even see a need for a paid support contract to get help in case things go wrong. I have seen people in companies who wanted to pitch such things to their bosses but found themselves in a difficult spot when trying to justify a budget for SVN tooling ("wait, did we not just got rid of ClearCase in order to save such costs...?") And naturally, the longer people have moved on with their lives, the less interest they will have in returning to past projects.
Re: ASF Subversion version
It looks like the stashing functionality is still experimental. Do you think there will be more funding in the future to complete it or do you think it may remain unfinished for a long period of time? Luke > On Dec 13, 2021, at 2:42 AM, Stefan Sperling wrote: > > On Sun, Dec 12, 2021 at 07:21:44PM -0600, Luke Mauldin wrote: >> That really is unfortunate to hear about the lack of funding. I see in the >> past few years there has been a lot of work done on the conflict resolver in >> version 10 and multiple stash implementations in versions 11+. Are those >> efforts being driven by people just working on it in their “spare time”? >> > > Those efforts were funded while development on was on-going.
Re: ASF Subversion version
On Sun, Dec 12, 2021 at 07:21:44PM -0600, Luke Mauldin wrote: > That really is unfortunate to hear about the lack of funding. I see in the > past few years there has been a lot of work done on the conflict resolver in > version 10 and multiple stash implementations in versions 11+. Are those > efforts being driven by people just working on it in their “spare time”? > Those efforts were funded while development on was on-going.
Re: ASF Subversion version
That really is unfortunate to hear about the lack of funding. I see in the past few years there has been a lot of work done on the conflict resolver in version 10 and multiple stash implementations in versions 11+. Are those efforts being driven by people just working on it in their “spare time”? Luke > On Dec 11, 2021, at 10:21 AM, Stefan Sperling wrote: > > On Sat, Dec 11, 2021 at 06:59:31AM -0600, Luke Mauldin wrote: >> Does the subversion project receive any funding from the ASF to hire >> professional developers to complete more complex tasks or is development 100% >> community driven and supported? > > The ASF does not pay anyone for development. I think this is an unfortunate > situation because many ASF projects slowly die off as funding dries up. > I believe the ASF is unlikely to change this long-standing practice, even > though there are other open source foundations which fund developers. > The FreeBSD and OpenBSD foundations pay some development (see their > financial reports), and apparently a new PHP foundataion is starting up > with the sole purpose of funding PHP developers. > > In the past many SVN developers were employed by companies who ran with > business models related to Subversion. This is the funding model the ASF > is promoting. However, as of a few years ago most such companies changed > direction and are no longer employing any SVN developers. Many people have > moved on as a result and are no longer active. > > (Disclaimer: I still receive a small amount of indirect SVN-related funding > via elego's SVN customer support. I occasionally use some of this time > to work on various things in Subversion, even though this budget is not > intended to fund development beyond customer-specific issues which can > only be fixed in the code base. And it is not enough to cover complex tasks.)
Re: ASF Subversion version
On Sat, Dec 11, 2021 at 06:59:31AM -0600, Luke Mauldin wrote: > Does the subversion project receive any funding from the ASF to hire > professional developers to complete more complex tasks or is development 100% > community driven and supported? The ASF does not pay anyone for development. I think this is an unfortunate situation because many ASF projects slowly die off as funding dries up. I believe the ASF is unlikely to change this long-standing practice, even though there are other open source foundations which fund developers. The FreeBSD and OpenBSD foundations pay some development (see their financial reports), and apparently a new PHP foundataion is starting up with the sole purpose of funding PHP developers. In the past many SVN developers were employed by companies who ran with business models related to Subversion. This is the funding model the ASF is promoting. However, as of a few years ago most such companies changed direction and are no longer employing any SVN developers. Many people have moved on as a result and are no longer active. (Disclaimer: I still receive a small amount of indirect SVN-related funding via elego's SVN customer support. I occasionally use some of this time to work on various things in Subversion, even though this budget is not intended to fund development beyond customer-specific issues which can only be fixed in the code base. And it is not enough to cover complex tasks.)
Re: ASF Subversion version
Does the subversion project receive any funding from the ASF to hire professional developers to complete more complex tasks or is development 100% community driven and supported? > On Dec 11, 2021, at 4:10 AM, Daniel Sahlberg > wrote: > > > > > Den lör 11 dec. 2021 10:54Bo Berglund skrev: >> On Fri, 10 Dec 2021 07:59:02 -0600, Luke Mauldin >> wrote: >> >> >Gotcha, thank you. >> > >> >> On Dec 10, 2021, at 7:14 AM, Mark Phippard wrote: >> >> >> >> ?On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 8:12 AM Luke Mauldin >> >> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> I noticed that the ASF is still running Subversion 1.9.x which was >> >>> released quite a few years ago. Does anyone know why they haven’t at >> >>> least upgraded to the 10.x LTS release which itself is over 2 years old >> >>> at this point? >> >> >> >> ASF Infra uses the package provided by the Linux distro they are using >> >> rather than building and maintaining their own package. >> >> >> >> Why is a constrruction company involved in Subversion? >> >> http://www.asfinfrastructure.com/about-us.php >> >> Strange > > > ASF Infra is the group within Apache Software Foundation that is managing the > infrastructure, ie servers and network. > > Kind regards > Daniel
Re: ASF Subversion version
Den lör 11 dec. 2021 10:54Bo Berglund skrev: > On Fri, 10 Dec 2021 07:59:02 -0600, Luke Mauldin > wrote: > > >Gotcha, thank you. > > > >> On Dec 10, 2021, at 7:14 AM, Mark Phippard wrote: > >> > >> ?On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 8:12 AM Luke Mauldin > wrote: > >>> > >>> I noticed that the ASF is still running Subversion 1.9.x which was > released quite a few years ago. Does anyone know why they haven’t at least > upgraded to the 10.x LTS release which itself is over 2 years old at this > point? > >> > >> ASF Infra uses the package provided by the Linux distro they are using > >> rather than building and maintaining their own package. > >> > > Why is a constrruction company involved in Subversion? > > http://www.asfinfrastructure.com/about-us.php > > Strange > ASF Infra is the group within Apache Software Foundation that is managing the infrastructure, ie servers and network. Kind regards Daniel
Re: ASF Subversion version
On Fri, 10 Dec 2021 07:59:02 -0600, Luke Mauldin wrote: >Gotcha, thank you. > >> On Dec 10, 2021, at 7:14 AM, Mark Phippard wrote: >> >> ?On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 8:12 AM Luke Mauldin wrote: >>> >>> I noticed that the ASF is still running Subversion 1.9.x which was released >>> quite a few years ago. Does anyone know why they havent at least upgraded >>> to the 10.x LTS release which itself is over 2 years old at this point? >> >> ASF Infra uses the package provided by the Linux distro they are using >> rather than building and maintaining their own package. >> Why is a constrruction company involved in Subversion? http://www.asfinfrastructure.com/about-us.php Strange -- Bo Berglund Developer in Sweden
Re: ASF Subversion version
Gotcha, thank you. > On Dec 10, 2021, at 7:14 AM, Mark Phippard wrote: > > On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 8:12 AM Luke Mauldin wrote: >> >> I noticed that the ASF is still running Subversion 1.9.x which was released >> quite a few years ago. Does anyone know why they haven’t at least upgraded >> to the 10.x LTS release which itself is over 2 years old at this point? > > ASF Infra uses the package provided by the Linux distro they are using > rather than building and maintaining their own package. > > Mark
Re: ASF Subversion version
On Fri, Dec 10, 2021 at 8:12 AM Luke Mauldin wrote: > > I noticed that the ASF is still running Subversion 1.9.x which was released > quite a few years ago. Does anyone know why they haven’t at least upgraded to > the 10.x LTS release which itself is over 2 years old at this point? ASF Infra uses the package provided by the Linux distro they are using rather than building and maintaining their own package. Mark