Mailinglist Archive: opensuse-buildservice (50 mails)

< Previous Next >
Re: [opensuse-buildservice] open source development model
  • From: Boyd Lynn Gerber <gerberb@xxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Wed, 8 Mar 2006 14:01:27 -0700
  • Message-id: <Pine.LNX.4.63.0603081351410.31435@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
On Wed, 8 Mar 2006, Robert Schiele wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 08:00:01PM +0100, Sonja Krause-Harder wrote:
> > On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 07:23:01PM +0100, Robert Schiele wrote:
> > > Actually I don't care whether it is a "shadow" svn or a "shadow"
> > > we-don't-use-revision-control-internally-at-all tool. Obviously software
> > > (like the build script) is already deployed to the build server in a version
> > > that is not in the public repository (because there is _no_ version of the
> > > build script in the repository but the server does actually build packages
> > > already).
> > This is the backend part I mentioned.

> On Wed, Mar 08, 2006 at 08:06:00PM +0100, Adrian Schroeter wrote:
> > The reason is basically that mls has his own mind in which state he want to
> > release his code. And he does currently not feel comfortable to release the
> > current hacked version. So this is his private opinion, but he promised to
> > release it this week, so I would like to avoid to stress this issue too much.
> I don't want to stress _this_ issue in special because it is only one instance
> of the problem. But I want to use this example to stress the general issue of
> the development model.


> The question is now: Do you want external developers in the openSUSE project
> or not? If you don't want them then you could just state that and I will see
> that I did completely misunderstand the intention of the openSUSE project up
> to now.
> But if you want to attract external developers a change in the development
> model should happen.
> Would you as a KDE project member port KDE to a new version of Qt if Trolltech
> would only give you a pointer to their API documentation of the new release
> but not the library itself with the reason that the code is not yet in a state
> that can be released? Would you feel comfortable if some employees of
> Trolltech started to port KDE to the new version but you had no chance to test
> their or your work because you don't have access to the new Qt release?
> Would you port glibc to a new kernel if you get only the list of system calls
> but not the kernel itself because it is not yet in a state the developer wants
> to release?
> So for the concrete example mls might reconsider when to release his code but
> for the wider view of the whole openSUSE project you and all other people
> responsible for the project might reconsider the general development model.
> While doing that you should also take into account what happened to other open
> source projects after changing the development model. For instance compare
> the speed of development and quality of gcc before the egcs fork and
> afterwards.
> Please don't do the same your colleagues did while developing Xgl. I am sure
> they are attracting now some developers from outside Novell because Xgl is a
> shiny thing but they could have more if they did develop it in an open way
> from the very beginning.

I agree totally with this. I started creating things with the first very
first public release of the SuSE linux distribution. I stopped after
being very frustrated with how things were. I every now and again look at
the cituation and wonder if I should start doing things again. I had done
a few packages for MySQL AB and their clients under NDA so I am not able
to make them public. But many of them moved to RH. This is in the US
where RH is big. I have always prefered SuSE or Caldera Linux above all
the other distributions. I am currently working with one other person on
a OSS alternitive to Appgen's Accounting SW.

The above describes exactly how I feel about this.

Boyd Gerber <gerberb@xxxxxxxxx>
ZENEZ 1042 East Fort Union #135, Midvale Utah 84047

< Previous Next >