Newsgroups: php.internals Path: news.php.net Xref: news.php.net php.internals:54438 Return-Path: Mailing-List: contact internals-help@lists.php.net; run by ezmlm Delivered-To: mailing list internals@lists.php.net Received: (qmail 23996 invoked from network); 7 Aug 2011 21:26:04 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO lists.php.net) (127.0.0.1) by localhost with SMTP; 7 Aug 2011 21:26:04 -0000 Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com smtp.mail=smalyshev@sugarcrm.com; spf=pass; sender-id=pass Authentication-Results: pb1.pair.com header.from=smalyshev@sugarcrm.com; sender-id=pass Received-SPF: pass (pb1.pair.com: domain sugarcrm.com designates 67.192.241.193 as permitted sender) X-PHP-List-Original-Sender: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com X-Host-Fingerprint: 67.192.241.193 smtp193.dfw.emailsrvr.com Linux 2.6 Received: from [67.192.241.193] ([67.192.241.193:51524] helo=smtp193.dfw.emailsrvr.com) by pb1.pair.com (ecelerity 2.1.1.9-wez r(12769M)) with ESMTP id EF/31-17758-CE20F3E4 for ; Sun, 07 Aug 2011 17:26:04 -0400 Received: from localhost (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by smtp9.relay.dfw1a.emailsrvr.com (SMTP Server) with ESMTP id 861ED3C0154; Sun, 7 Aug 2011 17:26:01 -0400 (EDT) X-Virus-Scanned: OK Received: by smtp9.relay.dfw1a.emailsrvr.com (Authenticated sender: smalyshev-AT-sugarcrm.com) with ESMTPSA id ED64C3C00BE; Sun, 7 Aug 2011 17:26:00 -0400 (EDT) Message-ID: <4E3F02E8.2050402@sugarcrm.com> Date: Sun, 07 Aug 2011 14:26:00 -0700 Organization: SugarCRM User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.6; rv:5.0) Gecko/20110624 Thunderbird/5.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: "RQuadling@GMail.com" CC: David Soria Parra , "internals@lists.php.net" References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Subject: Re: [PHP-DEV] [RFC] Choosing a distributed version control system for PHP (or not). Call for Participation. From: smalyshev@sugarcrm.com (Stas Malyshev) Hi! On 8/7/11 2:13 PM, Richard Quadling wrote: > There will be (not might be, but will be), multiple, and potentially > conflicting/incompatible, versions available. Which do I choose? If > everyone is capable of forking PHP, which is the official one? In the > event of a single official repo, then why bother with a DVCS? (I'll > admit I'm naive on the true requirement of DVCS, as I think SVN works > very well). You can build single-source workflows around DCVS too. The fact that everybody is keeping the copy of the history doesn't mean there can't be one "main" repository. The point of DCVS is not as much in doing different things from what we're doing now as doing roughly the same things in a better way - more efficiently. > The main thing I'm worried about is if feature X splits the core devs > so much that there are 2 competing repos, both with a significant > number of core devs supporting each repo, how do I choose which is > which? If my abilities include being able to code at the core level, > which should I support? Both? All 3, 4 or 10 different forks? This can happen right now - take the code, put it on any of the hosting facilities and declare yourself the new king of PHP. DCVS changes nothing here. It's the process that defines the workflows, not the technology. Technology just makes the workflows easier to execute. -- Stanislav Malyshev, Software Architect SugarCRM: http://www.sugarcrm.com/ (408)454-6900 ext. 227