Howdy. I expect some of you will know of me, but most of you won't
have a clue who I am. ("I'm world-famous in Poland!" --Mel Brooks)
I've been doing free software since the mid-80s (Deliver), I've had a
major hand in software that you probably use often (Perl), and I'm now
coordinator of kernel work for VA Linux Systems.
I've always gravitated toward config and build management software,
just because it's inherently interesting (to me, anyway :-)). My
personal experiences: SCCS was a revelation, but it didn't allow names
on versions, and the license was forbidding. RCS was much easier to
use, and free besides; it's been my personal standard since I found
it. PVCS ... how to describe it? Using PVCS was like being nibbled
to death by cats. Sharp-toothed cats. With a grudge. BitKeeper is
really neat, and I'd be using it right now if it didn't have such an
obnoxious license. CVS is a recent discovery for me -- I never used
it until just last year. It's a kludge, but it's a remarkably
effective kludge, which is why it's taken a long time for several
groups to get close to replacing it.
I want to see Subversion succeed because the free software community
needs sharp tools. Subversion embodies a better model, and is a
better implementation, than CVS. And the only other system working or
close to working -- BitKeeper -- has a dangerous license, and I don't
want people falling for it.
My concerns WRT CM design center on the needs of developers who are
tracking the sometimes conflicting work done by others who aren't
using the same CM system, and who distribute their work as patches.
As kernel coordinator, I do a little coding and a *lot* of patch
integration. The more of that kind of work can be automated, the
easier it is for everyone to cooperate in projects like the Linux
kernel. So I'd especially like to contribute to the parts of the
system involved in interfacing with the Outer Non-Subversion World.
So ... HI!
Chip Salzenberg - a.k.a. - <email@example.com>
"We have no fuel on board, plus or minus 8 kilograms." -- NEAR tech
Received on Sat Oct 21 14:36:27 2006