Re: GNOME DVCS Survey Results
- From: Olav Vitters <olav bkor dhs org>
- To: "Jason D. Clinton" <me jasonclinton com>
- Cc: foundation-list <foundation-list gnome org>, desktop-devel-list <desktop-devel-list gnome org>
- Subject: Re: GNOME DVCS Survey Results
- Date: Sun, 4 Jan 2009 15:51:25 +0100
On Sun, Jan 04, 2009 at 08:10:21AM -0600, Jason D. Clinton wrote:
> > This is pretty decent analysis going on here :)
> > I'd like to remind people of John Carr's recent blog post too, someone mentioned in the survey results actually. JC has been working on bzr with git protocol support, which would fulfil many of the requirements for having a GNOME DVCS.
> I'd like to point out that--of the 15 people who regularly use git and
> bzr--git still won.
That isn't a contest. It is a survey.
> <http://www.gnome.org/~shaunm/survey/first-picks-permutations.png> It
> seems to me that a lot of brain power, sysadmin time, and general
I am a sysadmin and disagree with your notion that sysadmin time is
somehow saved. I'd rather asses such things myself. Further, sysadmin
time is not so important.
> proliferation of Things To Learn for New People(tm) can be saved if
> the six people (1.04% of respondents) who ranked bzr above git in that
> graph can just bite the bullet and admit that git won. Can we please
It is a survey. It is NOT about 'winning'.
> just all move on?
Further, your explanation is incomplete. As you said, the graph is about
people knowing two DVCS systems. I wouldn't say I knew 2. Those 6 are
Now before you reply: we have a clear need for git to work (ranked 1st
50% of the time, etc). But if you say "move on", how do you think a
switch is made? Magic?
Anyway, I'd rather add John Carr to the sysadmin team. I plan to make a
proposal to switch GNOME to a DVCS where Git works using Johns
suggestion. Then other sysadmins can suggest whatever proposal they
want. These proposals can be investigated on merit and then a one can be
chosen (chosen as in: "go ahead and try if this would work", not "go
ahead blindly"; everything must be tested before a cutover).
 or whomever. Although I don't see how that would work.
] [Thread Prev