Date: Mon, 21 Sep 2020 09:21:59 +0200 From: Alexander Leidinger <Alexander@leidinger.net> To: freebsd-current@freebsd.org Subject: Re: Plans for git Message-ID: <20200921092159.Horde.yLakOjqLl4pZWCjCuYTfZVh@webmail.leidinger.net> In-Reply-To: <13a965d9-ef02-f876-dd6c-aa872b66d114@nomadlogic.org> References: <202009201400.08KE0PBd028190@gndrsh.dnsmgr.net> <13a965d9-ef02-f876-dd6c-aa872b66d114@nomadlogic.org>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
This message is in MIME format and has been PGP signed. --=_lqTMjdFjtEF4gS35EGxx3ka Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed; DelSp=Yes Content-Disposition: inline Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Quoting Pete Wright <pete@nomadlogic.org> (from Sun, 20 Sep 2020=20=20 08:41:13=20-0700): Not responding to Pete directly, but in general to this topic with=20=20 some=20parts of what Pete considers good as something to hook into. >>> making quarterly reports about this for almost a years as well. We put = out >>> calls for people to help with the efforts about the same time. We have >>> tried at every step of the way to be open and honest that this was goin= g to >>> happen. >> All developer centric communications.... I fail to see why it is important to non-developers, which (D)VCS the=20=20 developers=20of the product they use are using. It may be interesting,=20= =20 yes.=20It may have an impact on some (see the announcement of=20=20 deprecation=20of portsnap), but those which put their craftmanship into=20= =20 it,=20are the important ones. Not to tell that we don't need to inform=20= =20 (or=20to let them repeat all the arguments we provided internally=20=20 already),=20but the main use case for the VCS is to have those with=20=20 commit=20privilegues handle version control. I do not go to a lot of in-person meetings, I just follow the internal=20= =20 and=20the official mailinglists, and there was communication for a=20=20 loooong=20time (and no, I do not use git for FreeBSD stuff so far, so=20=20 you=20can not consider myself as someone who is eager to get FreeBSD=20=20 moved=20to git and as such has an interest in it --- but I do understand=20= =20 the=20reasoning and can agree to it). Any FreeBSD committer who tells he=20= =20 was=20not aware of it, has simply not paid attention to it. For any=20=20 non-committer=20see below. > I would argue that quarterly reports are actually one of the few [...] > honestly there has to be *some* responsibility of operators to at=20=20 >=20least make an effort to keep up to date on the status of the various=20= =20 >=20efforts in such a large project.=C2=A0 and as an outsider the idea that= =20=20 >=20comms can only happen on the mailing list isn't the greatest - how=20= =20 >=20am i to know that the idea of one person on the ML carries more=20=20 >=20weight than another, or one persons opinion is the "official" stated=20= =20 >=20opinion of the core group? I agree to that. And I agree that the status reports are a nice way of=20= =20 getting=20some kind of inside-information in a central way. And in my=20=20 opinion=20we gave early enough information about the migration to git.=20= =20 Maybe=20it can be organized, so that some guides for users (again,=20=20 deprecation=20of portsnap and such) are published first via the status=20= =20 reports=20(and other channels), before the switch to the git-repo=20=20 happens.=20We have no other official channel which is suitable for such=20= =20 way-ahead=20announcements IMO (yes, we should send a mail to=20=20 freebsd-announce=20when we switch + an entry in the news section of the=20= =20 website,=20and /maybe/ we should send a mail some weeks before the=20=20 switch=20too, but so far, I do not think this info should have been send=20= =20 to=20freebsd-announce, or be published on the website). In my opinion the people which drive this didn't keep it behind closed=20= =20 curtains,=20and they went step by step more public, as they made=20=20 progress.=20To me it looks like now, that they have something which is=20= =20 presentable=20to the world (and not only to committers), they presented=20= =20 it=20to the world. I do not think we can hold them responsible that we=20= =20 do=20not have "the one official channel" for this (hey... anyone feel=20=20 free=20to create it for the next big change, and document what shall be=20= =20 announced=20how via this channel). Bye, Alexander. --=20 http://www.Leidinger.net=20Alexander@Leidinger.net: PGP 0x8F31830F9F2772BF http://www.FreeBSD.org netchild@FreeBSD.org : PGP 0x8F31830F9F2772BF --=_lqTMjdFjtEF4gS35EGxx3ka Content-Type: application/pgp-signature Content-Description: Digitale PGP-Signatur Content-Disposition: inline -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1 iQIcBAABAgAGBQJfaFSXAAoJEBINsJsD+NiGCqsQAJASGqa0sHT5JGv8pwP28TIe auHTonQr60IcgdKIZUNl3ImvdzE/T8wUrU1E2quBRxQ+JeZmzFoDNLMImgt7urhY jgk5uI9sHh1Rl2kTgH7IOF8mwhlblhK6ud29LOZ2PEfRMag4h651fVgbue+9z9V/ M0W8UqT2nM4SJzrq2rTK+/CH/Jf9JUMY1yRLxsK1Up93EhQRCuuB7jKj4O6rnDVl DxNi1+MM/i8ORbM9LeCTw5a+gQEdZHPTLstz5vO6Z+FSzvlfkGh/a6CPH7YhrJeV 6dJlu0BgutUgFUBqnL8ojuw9LmkCc6WjR9kn2FY+vU+5oMRxdYql4zAyOVhBPqxO li9wfkz/8jB8i0mGbzi67XScnO7iYQ+r8ABW0laCWHSDfdpDb35q2dkuHv5M9Fp3 ft/zx/z7Wx/2R8J77CcWmME4L6ViE51W7Ix1135mcLlCVZolcX5MpkhGPexrtJR9 lZjogKkxtGmmFQIOAx5hHTndYjT2gGvfG57HKn48lFPVx4IS4cXjdei7Rznw9c8z gojpSaWpaNFvP8xqsbHLl8BRYgP1xqF1mDJvdOK/BhtZkosnLa6yMogYNYuR+MLA ADOD9RNlFBBVFQPZkKb50qgvkh770IIJpfS2c3IIk31NO+00CxMMV4jew9PRxdm4 jWRla214i0uCqnjQjP+Q =xOA2 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- --=_lqTMjdFjtEF4gS35EGxx3ka--
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?20200921092159.Horde.yLakOjqLl4pZWCjCuYTfZVh>