lists.openwall.net   lists  /  announce  owl-users  owl-dev  john-users  john-dev  passwdqc-users  yescrypt  popa3d-users  /  oss-security  kernel-hardening  musl  sabotage  tlsify  passwords  /  crypt-dev  xvendor  /  Bugtraq  Full-Disclosure  linux-kernel  linux-netdev  linux-ext4  linux-hardening  linux-cve-announce  PHC 
Open Source and information security mailing list archives
 
Hash Suite: Windows password security audit tool. GUI, reports in PDF.
[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]
Date:	Sun, 05 Sep 2010 16:59:54 -0700
From:	"Nicholas A. Bellinger" <nab@...ux-iscsi.org>
To:	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>
Cc:	Vladislav Bolkhovitin <vst@...b.net>,
	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...e.de>,
	Dirk Meister <dmeister@...-paderborn.de>,
	linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, Chetan Loke <chetanloke@...il.com>,
	Chetan Loke <generationgnu@...oo.com>,
	scst-devel <scst-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org, Mike Christie <michaelc@...wisc.edu>,
	FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp>
Subject: Re: [Scst-devel] Fwd: Re: linuxcon 2010...

On Sun, 2010-09-05 at 16:41 -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 05, 2010 at 02:50:47PM -0700, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
> > Anyways, if we are going to compare SCM distributed vs. centralized
> > workflow in terms of kernel projects, lets please at least compare
> > apples to apples here.
> > 
> 
> No, we should not be comparing SCMs at all here but rather 2 competing
> implementations based on quality of the code. You tried to bring SMC
> angle in and I am saying that it is BS.
> 

Again, without getting into another pointless flamewar,  I think the
main point here is that a open source project using a distributed
workflow (like git) has major advantages when it comes to working with a
larger group of developers than a centralized model (like SVN) does.

Because being a subsystem maintainer typically involves this type of
complex workflow involving lots of different parties, git is a tool that
was created (originally) expressely for a kernel workflow, and for those
types of people it works really, really well.

So, please understand that code and project workflow is only one of the
reasons why TCM/LIO v4 was selected over SCST.   I invite you to take a
closer look at the RFC Code that has been posted last week if you want
to get into the nitty-gritty techinical details, which this thread has
thus far been avoiding.

Best,

--nab

--
To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
the body of a message to majordomo@...r.kernel.org
More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
Please read the FAQ at  http://www.tux.org/lkml/

Powered by blists - more mailing lists

Powered by Openwall GNU/*/Linux Powered by OpenVZ