lkml.org 
[lkml]   [2001]   [Dec]   [29]   [last100]   RSS Feed
Views: [wrap][no wrap]   [headers]  [forward] 
 
Messages in this thread
    /
    Date
    From
    SubjectRe: The direction linux is taking
    [patchbot stuff]

    I normally stay out of these discussions because whatever I say usually
    gets taken as "he's just promoting BitKeeper" but I think a point needs
    to be made. I promise not to mention BK.



    One thing that people seem to be ignoring is that patches tend to need
    to be merged. The only way that can not be true is if the baseline is
    revved every time a patch is applied, people get the new baseline before
    they send in a patch.

    If you have N people trying to patch the same file, you'll require N
    releases and some poor shlep is going to have to resubmit their patch
    N-1 times before it gets in.

    If you look at this carefully, you'll see that in order to have an automated
    system, you must serialize all development which touches the same files
    (or the same areas in the same files if you are willing to automerge,
    but automerging outside of an SCM is difficult to say the least).

    I think this is basically why systems like what is being proposed fizzle
    out; it's certainly come up over and over. The world wants to work in
    parallel (think "1000's of Linux developers world wide", yeah, it's BS
    but there are certainly a couple hundred). Forcing people to work in
    serial isn't the answer.

    One way to quantify this is to ask Linus, Alan, Marcelo, et al, how much
    time they spend merging, i.e., how often do they get patch rejects?
    Regardless of the answer, it will be interesting. If it is a lot,
    then the patchbot idea has marginal usefulness. If it is none at all,
    then that says development is serialized, which means we may be leaving
    a lot of progress on the floor.

    I wouldn't be surprised if the serialized case is the answer, or close
    to it. It's rare that I hear Open Source leaders complain about merging,
    which suggests fairly serialized processes. In the commercial world,
    there is a ton of parallel development and merging is about 90% of what
    people do when they are interacting with the SCM system. Checkin accounts
    for about 8%, and after that it's all over the place.

    Anyway, I'm interested to see if there are screams of "all I ever do is
    merge and I hate it" or "merging? what's that?".
    --
    ---
    Larry McVoy lm at bitmover.com http://www.bitmover.com/lm
    -
    To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in
    the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org
    More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
    Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/

    \
     
     \ /
      Last update: 2005-03-22 13:14    [W:0.025 / U:29.708 seconds]
    ©2003-2016 Jasper Spaans. hosted at Digital OceanAdvertise on this site