mmcgrath at redhat.com
Wed Jun 20 20:31:47 UTC 2007
Karsten Wade wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-06-19 at 16:01 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote:
>> I'd really like there to be offline support in a manner that allows
>> non-commiters to be able to clone, modify, and provide a repo back to us that
>> we can pull from.
> I think the barrier described earlier is worse than we realize. It may
> seem like delving into technical details, but actually "centralized v.
> distributed VCS" is actually a strategic question.
> Strategically, we need to move _all_ of Fedora in the direction of
> distributed VCS.
> Honestly, this is the whole truth behind why we are working our arses
> off in Docs and L10N to get new ways for people to be able to
> contribute. We *must* have the XML/PO-based tools to get the work done,
> but making people go through all the hoops to gain write access to the
> SCM means we get maybe 1% of the interested people from "I want to help"
> to actually helping.
> You see a larger successful percentage with developers because they have
> been through the VCS account system learning curve in the past. Not so
> with people who want to write content or translate. This is why
> everything from GPG keys to CVS committing are so new to so much of our
> prospective contributors.
> So, Infrastructure is much closer to developers, in that the pool of
> potentials are more likely to be clued. But keeping it this hard to
> contribute means we are missing out on the 10000x more people who are
> not clued enough to get over the walls, but who would become so clued if
> we could get them in and working their way along the path to
> This goes back to the stuff Blizzard keeps talking about -- getting down
> the barriers between users and developers that our open collaboration
> tools ironically create.
:) I think this thread took a spin away from the Infrastructure SCM and
on to something else.
More information about the Fedora-infrastructure-list