On Tue, 2010-09-07 at 01:47 +0400, Vladislav Bolkhovitin wrote: > James Bottomley, on 09/06/2010 02:39 PM wrote: > >>>> Anyways, if we are going to compare SCM distributed vs. centralized > >>>> workflow in terms of kernel projects, lets please at least compare > >>>> apples to apples here. > >>> > >>> No, we should not be comparing SCMs at all here but rather 2 competing > >>> implementations based on quality of the code. You tried to bring SMC > >>> angle in and I am saying that it is BS. > >> > >> Again, without getting into another pointless flamewar, I think the > >> main point here is that a open source project using a distributed > >> workflow (like git) has major advantages when it comes to working with a > >> larger group of developers than a centralized model (like SVN) does. > >> > >> Because being a subsystem maintainer typically involves this type of > >> complex workflow involving lots of different parties, git is a tool that > >> was created (originally) expressely for a kernel workflow, and for those > >> types of people it works really, really well. > > > > Oh, for god's sake children. Why does every LIO vs SCST discussion turn > > into a pointless flameware over stuff no-one really cares about? If > > none of you has anything substantive to say: don't say it. > > James, sorry, but you can't blame us. I keep asking for clear rules and > don't receive much. So, there are speculations and pseudo-rules, which > sometimes go to the absurd, as in this SVN vs Git case. No surprise > then, that people have risen against this absurd (thanks a lot to them > for support!). > > Frankly, in all the situation around Linux SCSI targets I for quite a > long time feeling myself as a hero of a Kafka novel. Supposed to be > goals are to have the best code doing its job the best, but on practice > nobody cares about technical arguments and figuring out which subsystem > is the best. Instead, everything lives it own incomprehensible life, > where doesn't matter what you are doing, all already long ago decided > behind your back and you will never be told why. All accurate statements > not heard or, at best, called "handwaving", but dirty public opinion > manipulations based on half- and less-than-half- truth have very warn > welcome. This atmosphere is unhealthy, really. Sorry Vlad, but this is simply not the truth. You have had ample time to comment on the hundreds of TCM/LIO patches posted to linux-scsi and lkml over the last years, but you have chosen never to comment on a *single* one then, or even on a single one now of the dozens that have been posted in the last 3 weeks while this thread has been lumbering forward.. So at this point, I will once again to refrain from any non technical interaction with yourself. If you have geninue concerns about any of the TCM/LIO v4 code, then I suggest that you and your devels make them known from within threads containing [PATCH] and [RFC] tags, because I will not be bothering with anything that does not contain comments on creating new or improving existing design and code. Best, --nab -- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-scsi" in the body of a message to majordomo@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx More majordomo info at http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html
