2011/1/6 Nick Sabalausky <a...@a.a>: > "Caligo" <iteronve...@gmail.com> wrote in message > news:mailman.451.1294306555.4748.digitalmar...@puremagic.com... >> Perhaps using a modern SCM like Git might help? Everyone could have (and >> should have) commit rights, and they would send pull requests. You or one >> of the managers would then review the changes and pull and merge with the >> main branch. It works great; just checkout out Rubinius on Github to see >> what I mean: https://github.com/evanphx/rubinius > > I'm not sure I see how that's any different from everyone having "create and > submit a patch" rights, and then having Walter or one of the managers review > the changes and merge/patch with the main branch.
With the risk of starting yet another VCS-flamewar: It gives the downstream developers an easier option to work on multiple patches in patch-sets. Many non-trivial changes are too big to do in a single step, but requires series of changes. Sure, the downstream hacker could maintain import/conversion to VCS, but with added job, and when Walter or someone else gets to review they are no longer well-annotated patches. It also facilitates a setup where Walter (BDFL? ;) starts to trust some contributors (if he wants to) more than others, for them to work on private branches and submit larger series of patches for each release. Especially, when you detect a showstopper bug that blocks your progress, IMHO, it's easier using a DVCS to maintain a local patch for the needed fix, until upstream includes it. I've often used that strategy both in D-related and other projects just to remain sane and work-around upstream bugs, I just usually have to jump through a some hoops getting the source into DVCS in the first place. I think it was on this list I saw the comparison of VCS:es to the Blub-problem? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blub#Blub Although, I don't think the current setup have any _serious_ problems, I think there might be slight advantages to gain. OTOH, unless other current key contributors wants to push it, it's probably not worth the cost of change.