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]
Message-ID: <AANLkTikOgc+YbkzmOpJv=s4Oxj9S9LYQ5qf5jDbT0ycg@mail.gmail.com>
Date:	Sun, 5 Sep 2010 20:58:23 -0400
From:	Mark Deneen <mdeneen@...il.com>
To:	"Nicholas A. Bellinger" <nab@...ux-iscsi.org>
Cc:	Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@...il.com>,
	Mike Christie <michaelc@...wisc.edu>,
	Vladislav Bolkhovitin <vst@...b.net>,
	linux-scsi@...r.kernel.org, Chetan Loke <chetanloke@...il.com>,
	linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org,
	FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@....ntt.co.jp>,
	James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@...e.de>,
	scst-devel <scst-devel@...ts.sourceforge.net>
Subject: Re: [Scst-devel] Fwd: Re: linuxcon 2010...

> Hi Mark,
>
> I will always be advocating using the best tool for the job in any given
> situation.  So absoulutely, I would have picked bitkeeper over tarballs
> any day of the week 7 years ago, or over SVN if it had existed back
> then.

I can't say that I agree with this.  SVN existed, along with many
other open source choices -- the choice of BitKeeper was a mistake.

> But again, I think it's an important point that git is a tool that was
> made explictly for the linux kernel workflow.  Why would a new subsystem
> maintainer is participates in the kernel workflow ever use anything
> besides git at this point..?

Look, I'm not saying that I dislike git.  I use it as my SCM here.
However, git was in its infancy (or not even around) when SCST was
started.  It's not like they had a proprietary vendor go cold turkey
on them, forcing everyone to another solution.

> And sorry, but considering the obvious advantages in terms of workflow
> speed and flexibility that git brings to the table for a subsystem
> maintainer, calling the choise of SCM a nit-pick item demonstrates a
> level certain level of inexperience wrt to mainline kernel workflow.
> Which is perfectly OK, but if you really want to understand the issues
> at hand in a distributed vs. centrailized SCM model, I strongly suggest
> you watch Linus's talk as well.
>
> Best,
>
> --nab

I'm still calling it a nit-pick.  Vlad could switch to git in a short
amount of time if he felt so compelled.  This is like saying that the
quality of a car is based on the style of garage it is parked in.

Kind Regards,
Mark Deneen
--
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