[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       busybox
Subject:    Re: `busyboxvi` is not working like before
From:       tito <farmatito () tiscali ! it>
Date:       2014-10-31 20:25:14
Message-ID: 201410312125.14185.farmatito () tiscali ! it
[Download RAW message or body]

On Friday 31 October 2014 19:28:50 Laszlo Papp wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 31, 2014 at 6:11 PM, Laurent Bercot
> <ska-dietlibc@skarnet.org> wrote:
> >> Why? If Denis does not have time for the project, then we cannot
> >> really blame him. On the other hand, if a fork could work better with
> >> someone standing up, why not?
> >
> >
> >  Forking a project divides resources and weakens both children. It is
> > a possibility for big projects with lots of resources and several leaders
> > with conflicting goals.
> 
> That seems to be wrong in my view. I am sorry if that sounds snarky.
> Check out the libressl project which seems to be going into the right
> direction. You cannot really say that the openssl project was
> overloaded with contributors. Yet, my several years old vulnerability
> fixes were struggling to get in. In fact, I did not even get any
> reviews for them. This is not an issue with the libressl fork anymore.
> 
> > But when the problem is finding a maintainer with
> > enough time, expertise and willingness to maintain a project, forking is
> > definitely not a solution - on the contrary, it would only exacerbate the
> > problem. You were struggling to find one person, now you must find two.
> 
> Not quite, no. What I see is that Denis is the ultimate maintainer and
> *no one* else is allowed to commit changes from the contributors.

There is\was other people with write access to the source that
applied patches in the past when the maintainer was busy,
maybe they are busy too at the moment.

> On the contrary, I have seen a *lot* of bikeshed on this mailing list
> about insignificant details. The end results usually were missing
> features due to completely irrelevant implementation details in my
> opinion. I still remember one of my first patches that got more than
> 100 emails in that thread and the whole thing was about bikeshedding,
> again IMHO. Apparently, many people have resource for that, but not
> actual pragmaticism!

Lazlo you love this b* word, I myself would rather opt for "divergence of opinions"
but I'm sure you will say that is b* too. ;-)
 
> >  "Someone standing up" is not enough. What will work is "someone with
> > time, expertise and willingness to maintain a project such as Busybox
> > standing up".
> 
> Do you really think anyone of us think it otherwise? Assuming
> maturity, I cannot possibly imagine why you would think it otherwise.
> 
> > So far I haven't seen anyone checking all three boxes better
> > than Denys, so don't be so quick to replace him, pretty please.
> 
> That shows why I think you do not get what I am trying to write. My
> problem is not with Denys' skills. My problem is with Denys' time
> _and_ ultimate role without others being able to maintain certain
> parts.
> 
> busybox --list | wc -l
> 351
> 
> Does anyone here really think that one person can maintain 351 applets
> alone? I think it should be acceptable for others to stand up and not
> to have an exclusive person here responsible for everything. I am sure
> that there have been applet authors who would have been happy to give
> a helping hand with maintaining their code pieces.
> 
> Cheers, L.

Ciao,
Tito
_______________________________________________
busybox mailing list
busybox@busybox.net
http://lists.busybox.net/mailman/listinfo/busybox
[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]