On Feb 11, 2010, at 01:59 PM, Robert Collins wrote: >looms and pipelines have very different goals: > - looms aim to manage *and version* a collection of >usually-orthogonal-things with no defined merge order (what upstream >accept, they accept). And many things will never go upstream (e.g. >branding issues, workarounds for other platform issues). Specifically >looms have no intrinsic desire or need for fully-merged pipes, and a >need to let people collaborate on the structure of the loom. > - pipelines aim to let individual developers factor out different >aspects of a feature they are working on, to ease review and provide >clarity about development; they need fully merged to be the normal >situation, don't generally need cherrypicking, and have no need for the >structure of the pipe to be versioned.
This is a very valuable paragraph; it's the first time I can remember reading such a succinct description of the goals of these two features. Thanks! >I'm keen to share more code with pipelines, but they really are >different things, and I think it's likely harmful to both to push to >hard on them to become similar. From the outside, I think that looms and pipelines /feel/ very similar, except when they don't, which can be jarring. Maybe the focus that you're bringing on their different use cases will help users understand when to use one over the other. Right now it just seems like they're attacking the same problem. Great stuff! -Barry
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- ubuntu-distributed-devel mailing list ubuntu-distributed-devel@lists.ubuntu.com Modify settings or unsubscribe at: https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-distributed-devel
