X-Authentication-Warning: delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f X-Recipient: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Date: Sun, 23 Aug 2015 15:06:10 +0200 (CEST) X-X-Sender: igor2 AT igor2priv To: "Markus Hitter (mah AT jump-ing DOT de) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com]" X-Debug: to=geda-user AT delorie DOT com from="gedau AT igor2 DOT repo DOT hu" From: gedau AT igor2 DOT repo DOT hu Subject: Re: [geda-user] Antifork In-Reply-To: <55D9BDC7.4000608@jump-ing.de> Message-ID: References: <55D8D8B8 DOT 7050907 AT jump-ing DOT de> <55D9BDC7 DOT 4000608 AT jump-ing DOT de> User-Agent: Alpine 2.00 (DEB 1167 2008-08-23) MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII; format=flowed Reply-To: geda-user AT delorie DOT com Errors-To: nobody AT delorie DOT com X-Mailing-List: geda-user AT delorie DOT com X-Unsubscribes-To: listserv AT delorie DOT com Precedence: bulk On Sun, 23 Aug 2015, Markus Hitter (mah AT jump-ing DOT de) [via geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote: > Am 23.08.2015 um 06:46 schrieb gedau AT igor2 DOT repo DOT hu: >> >> On Sun, 23 Aug 2015, Evan Foss (evanfoss AT gmail DOT com) [via >> geda-user AT delorie DOT com] wrote: >> >>> The more functionality that goes into that branch, the more I >>> worry about project fragmentation. As cool as his branch is I >>> really miss autotools build and opengl shading. >> >> I think it is not a branch, but a fork. I think it's less of a >> project fragmentation. I regard pcb-rnd as a separate project, not as >> a branc of pcb. It's like gschem vs. pcb is not fragmentation for me >> either. > > pcb-rnd means to replace pcb, you can use only one of both. What exactly does make you think that? >gschem doesn't, it's a tool for a different task. > >> Opengl: I didn't delete that code, it's just disabled by default. As >> I have 0 interest in using or de velopen opengl stuff, it stays >> disabled > > With this attitude it's clearly subject to bit rotting. If OpenGL doesn't work well it needs fixing, not abandoning. So please fix it. Before I started on pcb-rnd, I was struggling with the gl-enabled versions from time to time. The final fix was always to revert back to a non-gl version. I can't recall anyone was attempting to fix any of these. I think the official standpoint is something like "buy bigger hardware and live with it". >> A very important factor along the ones listed, at least in my case, >> is: "I either sit down and to it in my fork and I have a working >> stuff or I get lost in a trying to keep things nice and compatible >> recursion and will never have the actual feature". > > Right. That's exactly the problem which needs tackling. Seeing forking as a solution is a bit shortsighted, though. > > This attitude totally misses an important point: you get only the fixes you do yourself. If somebody else fixes something in another fork, you have to duplicate this work. Forking is essentially giving up on collaboration. I agree. I waited long before the fork and did it as a last resort. When you have a project that's going in 90% the wrong direction (as in directions you, as an user don't like) while there's exactly 0 effort put in things you actually want, you either abandon the whole thing or fork. I don't yet see how switching to kicad or something else would have been better. > gEDA had never achieved the current level of sophistication if such > attitudes whould have been widespread 20 years ago. I agree. 10 years ago there was a team who more worked towards common goals. Back than these goals also happened to be much more aligned with my (user and developer) needs. It didn't 100% meet my needs, but was close enough that I didn't consider switching to something else or forking. I think the major problems on this is total lack of a working team with coherent and well defined goals and the DVCS. > I know a vcs flamewar will follow, and I won't join it. >> It seems there are only a few actual active PCB users out there. I >> don't have numbers, but I estimate there would be about 20 or 30 >> users wordlwide, who read the mailing list and really try to follow >> what's going on. > > Perhaps you confuse pcb with pcb-rnd users here. Sadly, I don't think so. Just read back the mailing list. Point out features or bugfixes in pcb or geda that brought up more than 2..4 users who _actively_ did something about it to help the developers. It simply doesn't happen too often. > New features in pcb-rnd are not new features in gEDA/pcb. Essentially you ask people to abandon gEDA/pcb in favour of pcb-rnd. Again, why do you think that? Looks like you are mistaken... > Antifork knows about no less than 20 forks now (thanks for the additions, Bert). So pcb has more forks than active developers, cool! > Think what whould happen if each of these forkers had a similar attitude > as you: these 20 users whould split up on 20 forks, making ... right, > only one user per fork: the forker him selfs. Well, to be honest, I think most of those forks are like that... And I still consider it a fail that you need scripts just to keep track of the forks that happen in the official VCS. > > >> In practice, this means: I am finishing the doc upgrade for scripting >> of pcb-rnd today, but I feel like this part of the investment was a >> waste: I didn't need better docs than the ones I had before. > > You see? If you had committed to the official repo, this task would have been done by others. Not really. First of all, it would be just yet-another-bitrotting branch or fork in the git mess. Second, I worked on features the official developers never found important enough or would be right against. I don't see how they would invest time in working on them in git and not in svn. > Almost all recent commits are about documentation. Collaboration means 50% more work for 200% more gain :-) In this case, it would be rather: - about 300% more work, because of git, lack of the auto release, auto packaging, auto publishin features of repo.hu - about the same amount of work on the actual features, since as I wrote in the previous paragraph, noone else would really join me working on my major features Sorry Markus, but we disagree in most points. I don't think I will be able to convince you about mines the same way as I don't think you'd be convince me about yours. We just have to live with it. Regards, Igor2