On 12/13/2016 10:47 AM, Christopher Head wrote: > On December 9, 2016 10:12:54 PM PST, "A. Wilcox" <awil...@adelielinux.org> > wrote: >> I think James has perhaps spoken ambiguously, or at least I hope that >> you have misunderstood his proposal. (If you haven't, then he's >> misunderstood mine.) >> >> The point of making it easier to fork is not only for the benefit of >> developers. As James says: >> >>> And then folks running gentoo-proper now can pick and choose which >>> innovations they want to include in the master tree. >> >> The idea being the people who "run" Gentoo, that being the developers >> of Gentoo, can pick what they want from the forks and derivatives, and >> include those improvements in the master tree. Then all Gentoo users, >> and all derivatives of Gentoo, can benefit from those improvements. > > You’re right, I took the word “run” in the sense of “execute” (the OS), not > in the sense of “manage” (the organization). If forks are a way to develop > work destined for upstream, they’re great. It’s when they become a tool for > fragmenting the community (of both users and developers) without any hope of > work being recombined that they become a problem. >
Sometimes people don't get along or play politics to fight within an organization. At that point, one is forced to route around the social damage and branch off. It's at the "host"'s discretion whether they want to pull from the fork, and I don't think pressuring or forcing either of those groups to work together would be a good idea. I'm applying this in a general sense, to clarify. It's true that it can create a maintenance burden and sometimes even confusion, but what else can you do about volunteers that can't agree on a way forward for a given project? -- Daniel Campbell - Gentoo Developer OpenPGP Key: 0x1EA055D6 @ hkp://keys.gnupg.net fpr: AE03 9064 AE00 053C 270C 1DE4 6F7A 9091 1EA0 55D6
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
