Re: debian github organization ?
Marc Haber <mh+debian-devel@zugschlus.de> writes:
> Thankfully, git is by far the best VCS on the market and the vast
> majority of people seem to agree. But imagine the outcry if ten years
> ago Sourceforge had said "our VCS is svn and we don't support anything
> else".
Er, they did, didn't they? I could have sworn that they only supported
CVS initially, and then only added Subversion, and getting Git support
took forever.
Launchpad, similarly, is probably suffering a lot from the decision to
only support bzr. (It suffers from some other things as well, such as
asset licensing and how difficult it is to stand up your own, but I think
the VCS is a major problem right now.)
So you're of course right -- there's a tradeoff.
However, I still stand by the decision to only support a single VCS, at
least when you start, because you can move a lot faster and implement a
lot more functionality that people care a great deal about. If you can
find the right VCS to use that 90% of people are content with (and I think
Sourceforge started there), I think your resources are much better put
into adding other features than adding more VCS support.
I have no interest in ever using bzr again, but I strongly suspect
Launchpad got a lot farther and does a lot more because the choice was
made to only support bzr. Now, of course, they need to switch to Git, or
at least support it, and that's going to be a ton of work, but I suspect
the order in which they did that made for a better system in the long run
than if they'd tried to support both bzar and Git (and Mercurial and the
other ones that were looking viable) at the start.
--
Russ Allbery (rra@debian.org) <http://www.eyrie.org/~eagle/>
Reply to: