Ean Schuessler wrote:
On Friday 31 August 2007 09:56:19 am Adrian Crum wrote:
No I haven't.
Define "rouge committless forks" please.
I mean forks in the tradition of the Linux kernel. GIT was designed around a
development model where there are many paths of simultaneous development
going on, each with their own version history. None of those repositories
are, functionally, a "master" repository. They are all peers and the role of
Linus' repository is strictly a matter of convention and reputation.
I think following a similar model would be beneficial for OFBiz. There are a
lot of reasons to constrain the number of primary committers and most serious
users are going to need to maintain their own private "fork". At this point I
mostly regard the Apache repository as the Hotwax version of OFBiz. The other
major version at this point being the Open Source Strategies OpenTaps
repository.
This seems different from what you described above with the Linux kernel... but
I'm interested to hear more of how you think that would work independent of
what is going on with OFBiz and OFBiz derivatives right now.
The way I look at it is that the open source project really has one purpose: it allows different groups to collaborate and do things together that would be too difficult and expensive any group to really do on their own.
Hotwax is becoming one of the larger OFBiz-based consultancies (though
certainly not even close to the biggest), but even Hotwax is WAY too small to
handle something the size and scope of OFBiz... like probably at least 10 to 1
and perhaps a 100 to 1 level of magnitude difference.
The ASF repository is definitely not meant to be Hotwax only, and I don't see
it as that at all. In fact, it worries me a LOT to see anyone say something
like that. I don't think it's even close to true either... the traffic in the
mailing lists, issue tracker AND the SVN repository all tell a very different
story!
We started out using SVK here in order to create our own local revision
history but still find that tool limiting. GIT and Mercurial are the leaders
for that style of development and GIT would seem to have the most intensive
community around it.
IMO it's totally fine and normal for there to be local repos that groups
maintain for their projects.
Whatever is done and however it's done the trick is how do you work with
others? If you don't have processes and practices to participate in a group
effort, then you're really not participating in the group...
OFBiz could greatly benefit from more contributors and committers, and from
experience with this type of software it is difficult for enthusiasts and
hobbyists to participate part-time, so the people doing stuff full-time based
on OFBiz are the most valuable to the project... and by participating in the
project open the door to receive benefits that just aren't possible any other
way! Collaboration really is the WHOLE point of an open source project, or to
put it in ASF terms: communication is the key!
-David
