I'm a bit sad that this discussion turned so quickly into a shootout, even though it started so well.
> You simply cannot solve a problem > of any signifficant proportions without changing large amounts of the > existing codebase. Sure, you change large portions of the existing code, but you do it *incrementally*, in the open, and taking feedback from the existing community into account. You may want to read the following article and its references, which describes the situation quite well: http://darkforge.blogspot.com/2010/02/code-bomb-or-newbie-with-big-ideas.html For me, this means: - A big, monolithic rewrite gets a -1. - Infrastructure changes that don't bring a concrete advantage to either the users, administrators or plugins developers get a -1. > A key benefit of moving to a relational model, is that we attract a much > wider audience, and thus get more help. I doubt this. Just having a normalized database won't magically attract flocks of new, motivated developers. > This happens because people like > Josh and myself and doubtless many others, can eventually reccommend the > product for use in production environments, without a major up-front > (re)development cost. You may be surprised to learn that people didn't wait for that change to put Trac into production environments. As a starting point, see: http://trac.edgewall.org/wiki/TracUsers Although I wouldn't suggest forking as readily as Noah, I agree with him that we have seen too much hand-waving and too little concrete argumentation until now. -- Remy
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
