Re: [Gnu-arch-users] Inertia on lkml?

[Zack Brown]

On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 03:55:10PM +0100, Adam Spiers wrote:
> Zack Brown (address@hidden) wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 24, 2003 at 12:23:06PM +0100, Adam Spiers wrote:
> > >     From: Linus Torvalds
> > >     To: Andrea Arcangeli
> > >     Subject: Re: log-buf-len dynamic
> > >     Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 14:53:32 -0700 (PDT)
> > > 
> > >     Andrea - please just shut up. 
> > > 
> > >     Until you can point to anything even _remotely_ as good as
> > >     BitKeeper, there's no point in just continually trying to start a
> > >     flame-war.
> > > 
> > > How is it that such brilliantly clever guys such as Linus and Andrea
> > > seem *so* slow on the uptake when it comes to arch?  What am I
> > > missing?  It's not as if arch hasn't been mentioned many many times on
> > > lkml already ...
> > 
> > Linus is often a slow decision-maker. Once he makes up his mind to do
> > something, like include devfs or khttpd in the kernel, he can take a
> > long time to change his mind again, even after it becomes very clear to
> > everyone that an alternative is better.
> 
> [snipped]
> 
> I agree with all of that.  I'm just a bit concerned by the way his
> words above imply (at least to me) that arch hasn't even registered on
> his radar.

I think that's right. It's *not* on his radar, and won't be until many
other kernel people put it there. The sad truth.

>  If it had, I would have expected him to phrase that more
> like:
> 
>       Instead of continually trying to start a flame-war, why don't
>       you go and join the efforts of a worthy contender for BitKeeper,
>       such as GNU arch?

The fact that arch is now GNU arch does not endear it to Linus. The sad
truth too.

Linus is also done asking people to work on this. He asked for a long
time, and then BK came along. Aside from the rare hint, he's done.

>  Then come back when you've helped shape that
>       project into a truly viable replacement.
> 
> If Linus and other key lkml players said things like this more often,
> I would expect a lot of the energy currently spent in these flame wars
> to be redirected towards more positive action.

Once the BK->cvs->tla gateway goes up, we can expect some kernel developers
to start using it for their work, just out of curiosity. Some of them
will stick with it and start extolling its virtues. They may also write
a 'tla-kernel.howto' or semething.

Arch is still filled with controversial features, though. We shouldn't
expect kernel guys to just take to it like penguins to water. (ouch ;-)

Be well,
Zack

> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gnu-arch-users mailing list
> address@hidden
> http://mail.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/gnu-arch-users
> 
> GNU arch home page:
> http://savannah.gnu.org/projects/gnu-arch/

-- 
Zack Brown