From: | Fabien COELHO <coelho(at)cri(dot)ensmp(dot)fr> |
---|---|
To: | Mark Mielke <mark(at)mark(dot)mielke(dot)cc> |
Cc: | PostgreSQL Developers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL 8.4 development plan |
Date: | 2008-02-08 03:56:14 |
Message-ID: | alpine.DEB.1.00.0802072209010.4808@briare.cri.ensmp.fr |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Dear Mark,
> I encourage all to keep their minds open.
Good:-)
My 0.02 EUR (or even less) on the recurrent SCM flame war on the list.
ISTM that a decentralized or distributed SCM for PostgreSQL would be a bad
move, however great it would be at branching and merging. For me it is a
philosophy question: if PGSQL is a "common work", then everything should
be open and shared, and a centralized systems make sense to embodied this.
Even if one can publish one's branch easily with GIT, it's not the same,
because it is still a personnal branch somehow.
> From WordNet (r) 3.0 (2006) [wn]:
git
n 1: a person who is deemed to be despicable or contemptible;
"only a rotter would do that"; "kill the rat"; "throw the
bum out"; "you cowardly little pukes!"; "the British call a
contemptible person a `git'" [syn: {rotter}, {dirty dog},
{rat}, {skunk}, {stinker}, {stinkpot}, {bum}, {puke},
{crumb}, {lowlife}, {scum bag}, {so-and-so}, {git}]
I'm not sure I would be proud to use such a stupidly named tool for a
"common work". I really do not share Linus humor, and apparent contempt
for other people. GIT implements "I want to chose whom I work with, and
don't care about the others, and don't ever want to have to look at their
ugly patches", or at least it is what I understood from his talk at Google
last year. Would this be the future spirit of PG devel? I hope not.
--
Fabien.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jaime Casanova | 2008-02-08 05:27:23 | Re: 2WRS [WIP] |
Previous Message | Jignesh K. Shah | 2008-02-08 03:15:16 | Re: Why are we waiting? |