[Kde-scm-interest] A concept for "moving to Git" and translations

[Chani]

On May 28, 2009 18:46:05 Ian Monroe wrote:
> On Thu, May 28, 2009 at 6:20 PM, Albert Astals Cid <aacid at kde.org> wrote:
> > A Divendres, 29 de maig de 2009, Thomas Zander va escriure:
> >> On Friday 29. May 2009 00.34.47 Albert Astals Cid wrote:
> >> > Well, everyone keeps saying "We are loosing developers because of
> >> > SVN", can't I extend that to "We are loosing developers because of
> >> > CURRENT_VCS"?
> >>
> >> only if CURENT_VCS equals svn.  What is your point?
> >
> > My point is that i don't see why "We are loosing developers because of
> > SVN" is ok and "We are loosing developers because of git" is not ok now
> > or in 3 years
>
> You've entirely lost me here.

I think albert thinks that if we're losing developers now because they don't 
want to use svn, we may be just as likely to lose deveolpers in the future 
because they don't like git.
I'm not sure where this "we're losing developers because of svn" argument came 
from in the first place, though.

>
> > and why we should not make the scripty system vcs agnostic now that we
> > have the 'chance'.
>
> Well decoupling parts of scripty from the VCS details is probably good
> design, just don't think it should be a feature goal.
>
> > P.S: I know git is the r00lz and will never be anything better than it
> > but there are some of us (stubborn in thiago notation) that still don't
> > like it
>
> That's a pretty horrible reason to support multiple VCS's for the same
> project though.

supporting multiple vcs's because not everyone wants the same vcs... well, on 
the surface it doesn't sound so bad - but it really wouldn't work out in 
practice.

people who are new to KDE would have a bunch of different VCS's to learn about, 
and people who contribute to multiple areas in KDE would have a bunch of vcs's 
to worry about too, and I think it would end up being quite annoying. and then 
there's the kde-review process and other code movement - it's a lot harder to 
move code+history between two different VCSs.

switching to git is going to depend on a lot of communication and people in 
the community working together - there are already people worried using a 
distributed vcs might fragment the community. I think we can overcome that so 
long as it's handled well, but people wandering to entirely different VCS's 
might be a bit much.

although someday, years from now, I bet something way better than git will 
come along, and it'll be convenient to have less switching work to be done 
then.

in any case, I'm probably going to take the lazy route and just put git 
support in where it's needed. if someone wants to rewrite scripty entirely and 
make it all modular and shiny, go right ahead, but I don't have *that* much 
time on my hands.

-- 
This message brought to you by eevil bananas and the number 3.
www.chani3.com
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://mail.kde.org/pipermail/kde-scm-interest/attachments/20090528/f698dc34/attachment-0001.sig