While I do think that writing a Java re-implementation would be a bad
idea and you would probably cry yourself to sleep at night trying, you
shouldn't be discouraged from contributing in other ways. I have found
the Subversion community to be one of the nicest in the Open Source
world. I think a couple of things about your emails (all of them not
just this thread) rubbed people the wrong way:
1. Statements regarding the appropriate-ness of Subversion in a
"corporate environment". While Collab, who sponsors some svn
developers, has a very big interest in catering to corporate users, most
Open Source developers are simply motivated by their own needs and
desires. We use Subversion in my company, but there are some people
that will never be able to use it due to their corporate policies.
2. A lot of people come to the list and say either:
a. "There is no way anyone will ever use this app without THIS feature."
This is obviously not true since people use Subversion every day without
whatever feature that is.
b. "If you add just THIS feature, my company/project/mother could use
Features should solve a whole bunch of peoples itches before development
and maintenance time are devoted to them. Especially true if that
feature is not going to be implemented by the person requesting it!
3. Most of the features you requested HAVE been discussed before, pros
and cons hashed out, decisions made, enhancement requests were filed,
etc. People do get testy when someone shows up to discuss "new things"
that are old hat to those who have been in the community for a while.
Don't take it personally.
FWIW, I would recommend sticking around, lurking for bit (I lurk full
time since I have not found a need that I am qualified to fill), learn
more about the community and then decide if it really is so hostile that
it's not worth contributing.
My two cents.
Robert Simmons wrote:
> OK OK ... you convinced me ... I wont do it. *surrenders* It was only an idea.
> In fact the general hostile reactions I have been getting on this list to even
> suggestions doesn't make me want to contribute at all..
> Best of luck.
> -- Kraythe
> "Ben Collins-Sussman" <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote in message
>>"Robert Simmons" <email@example.com> writes:
>>>Yes but where is the design and architecture documentation? ;-) Im
>>>not terribly confidently expecting it to exist but it would be
>>>convenient. Reading code to figure out architecture is very slow and
>>>tedious and most people simply wont bother. If it comes down to
>>>having no hints other than the code base, I may not bother. I want
>>>to write a library, not learn to write C all over again.
>>Read the entire Subversion book, especially chapter 7. That explains
>>a lot of architecture. There's also a very old, very general design
>>document sitting here, which gives a good overview:
>>By the way, there is no "one protocol" for Subversion. The access to
>>the repository is an abstract API, so anyone is free to write a custom
>>protocol. At the moment, we have a stateful custom protocol which
>>talks to an 'svnserve' server, and a WebDAV/DeltaV variant protocol
>>that speaks to an Apache server. And and there's a 'no-network'
>>protocol for accessing a repository directly. Which will you
>>reimplement in pure Java? All of them?
>>And then take a gander over at libsvn_wc design notes:
>>You wouldn't believe how difficult it is to manage a working copy that
>>versions directories, and allows mixed-revisions. The number of bugs
>>and edge-cases is staggering. People complain about what a 'mess'
>>libsvn_wc is, and how it needs to be rewritten from scratch, but
>>nobody has the guts to do it. The job the library is doing is
>>incredibly complex, and nobody is 100% yet that a new library could be
>>doing the same job significantly better.
>>But really, you need to read the whole book and actually *use* the
>>software to get a good grip on how difficult a problem this is.
>>Writing a version control system is not something that's trivially
>>tackled by a committee with "Good Object Oriented Principles". It's a
>>Really Hard Problem. Ask the huge community here that's been working
>>on it for three years. Ask Tom Lord & friends over on the arch
>>project. Ask how many years Larry McVoy has spent on Bitkeeper.
>>It it possible to write a client in pure java? Sure, absolutely. But
>>only by someone who knows both the original problem and Subversion
>>incredibly intimately. There's no magic blueprint we can hand you.
To unsubscribe, e-mail: firstname.lastname@example.org
For additional commands, e-mail: email@example.com
Received on Wed Oct 22 03:50:26 2003