[svn.haxx.se] · SVN Dev · SVN Users · SVN Org · TSVN Dev · TSVN Users · Subclipse Dev · Subclipse Users · this month's index

Re: Subversion in 2010

From: Hyrum K. Wright <hyrum_wright_at_mail.utexas.edu>
Date: Thu, 14 Jan 2010 13:47:15 -0600

On Jan 14, 2010, at 11:54 AM, Mark Phippard wrote:

> On Thu, Jan 14, 2010 at 11:49 AM, Hyrum K. Wright
> <hyrum_wright_at_mail.utexas.edu> wrote:
>>
>> On Jan 14, 2010, at 9:45 AM, Mark Phippard wrote:
>>
>>>
>>> With the pace of wc-ng slowed to a crawl it seems like we are going to
>>> have a hard time even getting that feature to the point of a release.
>>> Why would we want to even consider stuffing another feature into the
>>> mix?
>>>
>>> We cannot stop people from working on the features they want to work
>>> on, and obliterate is often requested, so if the feature materializes
>>> in time for a release great. But I'd hope we are all redoubling our
>>> efforts on finishing wc-ng so we can do this release and start seeing
>>> the performance improvements it can bring.
>>
>> I too, would like to see wc-ng completed soon. It just a question of resources. As you
>> have noticed, with only two or three people working on it, the bus factor isn't too high. The
>> best way to get wc-ng completed would be for folks to start (or continue) hacking, and for
>> people who have influence over development resources to allocate those resources in a
>> manner which encourages wc-ng completion. A team of two or three working full-time is
>> going to take a while; a larger group of folks can help expedite it significantly.
>
> I understand, and it is one of the reasons I keep prodding. It seems
> like more alarms need to be raised publicly with an accompanying call
> for help. I am not on IRC 24/7 and from the silence in the list, I
> keep thinking that people are "about" to get working on it again. But
> it seems like not very much has happened since October, as opposed to
> the flurry of activity in the few months leading up to that.

This is a pretty accurate depiction of the situation.

> I agree we need to get more people involved. I keep wanting to tell
> Paul and Mike to devote more time specifically to WC-NG. It feels
> like there is a lack of public direction though. What is the plan?
> What has been completed? What is left to do? Who is already working
> on some of these items?
>
> Put another way, if I asked Paul and Mike to focus on helping, then
> where do they start? What do they work on? Where are there hints as
> to what to do? I think this information is even more critical for
> people that maybe only have a few hours every few days to work on
> this. Where would they even start or no what to do?

Asking questions is probably the first step. Bert, myself, Greg, and maybe a couple of others could give pointers as to where to start. Off the top of my head, I can think of a couple non-trivial tasks regarding loggy and workqueues which could be worked on in parallel. The upgrade code also needs some work (though I thought Greg was going to take a look at that this week).

I'm open for email discussion, IRC chats, conference calls, whatever it takes to get things going and help people get involved.

> Finally, who exactly is still working on WC-NG? It seems like it is
> mostly just you now and that your time for this is only a small
> fraction of that. So in reality it seems like we have maybe .25
> people working on this, not 2 or 3.

And that is the problem.

-Hyrum
Received on 2010-01-14 20:47:53 CET

This is an archived mail posted to the Subversion Dev mailing list.