Re: Introduction and some comments ;-)

[Peter T Mount <peter@retep.org.uk>]

At 14:34 31/01/2002 -0800, Chris Albertson wrote:

>I've been wanting to work that way for some time.  It seems however
>most people on this list are used to the "one person, one program"
>programming model.  The only way anything gets done using that method
>is if there is a very smart person with much time on his hands.
>That combination is uncommon.  You get more done when you can put
>the skills of several people together.
>
>I'd like to use a model from some successfull free softwre project.
>Some good, well run projects, IMO, are the Postgresql DBMS, the KDE
>project and others.  What they have i common is use of good tools
>for version control, intergroup communication and testing and have
>a limited structure at least a method for decision making.  All you
>really need is a CVS server, e-mail list, bug tracking system and
>an FTP/web site. www.sourcefourge.net provifes this to anyone who
>will sign up.

Obviously being a PostgreSQL developer, I know how their model works ;-)

Most people have read-only access to the cvs repository. If they find a 
problem, then they fix it and submit a patch for a developer who knows that 
part of the code to test and apply to the repository. Most patches get 
applied, only a few don't either because it causes other problems, or it's 
something that would break another patch.

Only a few (~20) developers have write access to the repository.

As for sourceforge, I have one project on there (although not much has 
happened on it for some time now), but sourceforge is useful if you don't 
have an online server to put your own project on. Also, there's no (or 
little) configuring to be done, as they have it automated, and have tonnes 
of useful tools (bug tracking, test servers etc).

>You also need people wanting to work this way.

Not necessarily. Say you used sourceforge. A solitary developer (and I'll 
admit I prefer it that way) can still work on their own, but use 
sourceforge to handle the repository. Then, version control is handled for 
them, and more importantly those using the software can always get the 
latest version if they want.

>You also need well stated (written) goals. I'll propose a few:
>
>1) It is not enough to have a working pileline.  We need a turnkey
>system that can be used by software non-experts.
>
>2) It should have multiple internal stable interfaces to facilitate
>swaping parts in and out without effects the non-swapped parts.

Say you had a "TASS" project on sourceforge. You could then have as 
separate modules say the pipeline, each part as you point out here, etc.

Sourceforge is a useful tool to augment what we already have here.

Peter