On Mon, Jul 7, 2008 at 6:17 PM, C. Scott Ananian <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I think we're all agreed that even small forks have large long-term > costs, and we'd prefer to avoid them where at all possible -- which we > all agree seems to be the case at present.
Here I disagree - small and medium sized forks can be low cost, and highly dynamic, specially when you are using a merge-friendly SCM (git!). The last 6 years of my life have been working with projects that ran ahead of their upstreams -- mostly moodle -- and things were horribly painful before git. Once git was usable, it just became a matter of a bit of discipline. - Long term forks are death, short term forks are opportunity. - Sugar isn't a forking problem :-) as olpc team and sugar team overlap significantly. - I think we are overstressing about a bunch of strings. People rightly say that forks are costly and nightmarish, but they are talking about a few thousand patches, and deltas of 10K lines, that when merged resulted in a few hundred gnarly conflicts. Strings you say? I landed 130 patches worth 4K lines of diff between 1.8 and 1.9 of moodle, rewriting one of the core libs completely :-) cheers, m -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- School Server Architect - ask interesting questions - don't get distracted with shiny stuff - working code first - http://wiki.laptop.org/go/User:Martinlanghoff _______________________________________________ Devel mailing list Devel@lists.laptop.org http://lists.laptop.org/listinfo/devel