nah mate, you are wrong in putting KDE at the same level as the kernel, they're totally different. First, remeber that QT is maintained by a lot less people than the rest of KDE and QT represents an important part of KDE. Then look at how many developers are involved in making changes to the remaning core components (kparts, etc.). i bet you dont get that many. and then you have the *vast* majority of kde developers, which are application developers. in other words, they are far too busy with their own world to be changing the core all the time.
now, with the kernel its dramatically different: a huge number of developers work on the core, and when you change something then everything can go down.
i'm not saying version control is bad, i'm saying it would not solve any of the problems we have in the kernel at the moment. yeah, sure rik would have applied all the patches if he could commit them, but if his shotgun debugging is as bad as some people were saying, then VM would be a huge mess by now. whereas this way, rik is so pissed off that he will make sure his VM is the best. so either way linus has won...:-)))) he made rik take it personally and you dont get better code quality than under those conditions.
remember, and the old finn does not care much about the side effects (personal stuff, etc.), as long as the code is good...
man, this type of comments really pisses me off. why is everyone falling on top of linus sudenly? linus receives billions of patches from different people, do you really want him to check carefully each patch and make sure they work???
he is right on putting the responsability on top of the maintainer, otherwise IT WOULD NOT BE A DISTRIBUTED FRIGGIN SYSTEM. and a project this large can only work if everyone makes sure their little bit works. now i tell you this much, y'all falling on top of linus but i reckon that if rick had followed linus's model and had made sure the VM patches were all applied in order, at this time we would probably be celebrating the reasonable quality of the 2.4 series. thats how ficke we are, mate.
I'm all for debate, and public discussion, but some of the comments I've seen flying around sound more like teenage namecalling than professional developers with a disagreement. Linux isn't infallible, neither is Alan
yeah, but sometimes it seems rik is probably more of a teenager than linus... for example, not so long ago a thread started *again* regarding linus's theory of "linux evolution vs design" and guess what: rik still seemed like he did not understand the macro vs micro views of the linux environment.
rik must be an excellent coder (hell, he's doing a vm...) but - and i do beg your pardon here rik - sometimes he's kinda slow. having said that, if linus was randomly dropping patches like he admits he does all the time one must understand riks frustration.
at any rate, i think it is better to have all of these discussions out here in the open instead of having them behind close doors. how many times does a manager get away with behaviour that is much worse than linus's patch dropping and no one gets to know about it? and how many times did this cause the end of a good product?
Slashdot Mirror
nah mate, you are wrong in putting KDE at the same level as the kernel, they're totally different. First, remeber that QT is maintained by a lot less people than the rest of KDE and QT represents an important part of KDE. Then look at how many developers are involved in making changes to the remaning core components (kparts, etc.). i bet you dont get that many. and then you have the *vast* majority of kde developers, which are application developers. in other words, they are far too busy with their own world to be changing the core all the time.
:-)))) he made rik take it personally and you dont get better code quality than under those conditions.
now, with the kernel its dramatically different: a huge number of developers work on the core, and when you change something then everything can go down.
i'm not saying version control is bad, i'm saying it would not solve any of the problems we have in the kernel at the moment. yeah, sure rik would have applied all the patches if he could commit them, but if his shotgun debugging is as bad as some people were saying, then VM would be a huge mess by now. whereas this way, rik is so pissed off that he will make sure his VM is the best. so either way linus has won...
remember, and the old finn does not care much about the side effects (personal stuff, etc.), as long as the code is good...
soup
man, this type of comments really pisses me off. why is everyone falling on top of linus sudenly? linus receives billions of patches from different people, do you really want him to check carefully each patch and make sure they work???
he is right on putting the responsability on top of the maintainer, otherwise IT WOULD NOT BE A DISTRIBUTED FRIGGIN SYSTEM. and a project this large can only work if everyone makes sure their little bit works. now i tell you this much, y'all falling on top of linus but i reckon that if rick had followed linus's model and had made sure the VM patches were all applied in order, at this time we would probably be celebrating the reasonable quality of the 2.4 series. thats how ficke we are, mate.
nuff said.
soup
I'm all for debate, and public discussion, but some of the comments I've seen flying around sound more like teenage namecalling than professional developers with a disagreement. Linux isn't infallible, neither is Alan
yeah, but sometimes it seems rik is probably more of a teenager than linus... for example, not so long ago a thread started *again* regarding linus's theory of "linux evolution vs design" and guess what: rik still seemed like he did not understand the macro vs micro views of the linux environment.
rik must be an excellent coder (hell, he's doing a vm...) but - and i do beg your pardon here rik - sometimes he's kinda slow. having said that, if linus was randomly dropping patches like he admits he does all the time one must understand riks frustration.
at any rate, i think it is better to have all of these discussions out here in the open instead of having them behind close doors. how many times does a manager get away with behaviour that is much worse than linus's patch dropping and no one gets to know about it? and how many times did this cause the end of a good product?