DVCS does not mean anti-centralized.
DVCS does not introduce arguments between developers, rather ameliorating them as it's easier to try things out and becoming more knowledgeable before discussing issues.
It's about how to define the build and release systems. Obviously, you need a 'head revision' or 'release branch' or whatever you want to name the code that's defined as the one version that makes up the product. Having input from different places makes no difference on the release part of the process. Developers move the changes to the release/central build version just like they would with the old model.
Almost all resistance I've seen so far is something similar to 'I don't like this because I have to learn something new' obfuscated behind a bunch of misconceptions.
There's nothing that suggests that centralized version control and corporate go hand in hand. A common misconception if you ask me, using a DVCS in every day work in a large corporate environment.... or ask sun for that matter.
It's absolutely possible to have central release versions with DVCS, it's all about work flow practices.
No, you probably are not going to go to google, but who are you going to? Is a license going to get you what you want *really*?
Will you be able to affect their next release? Maybe, but surely not "right now".
If the connection's down for instance you won't be able to send mail "right now" either.
If you're asking for reliability, what exactly makes you think desktop will provide that in a better way? I for one surely don't feel that I'm in control working with proprietary software as I cannot affect it in any way.
Yeah, Zappa was a true genious. Another thing he said back in the seventies IIRC, was something in the lines of "sometime in the future, the bulk of new music will consist of recycled ideas". And look, we got sampling a number of years later. Today, the number of true musical innovation creations topping the charts steadily dwindle.
On her PC.
I helped her install it, just told her it's a free operating system, just as good as windows.
She's been satisfied with it for about a year now.
I didn't have to teach her a single thing, just set it up with localization.
It didn't take five minutes but alot less than it would have to install windows for her.
That's what I had to do.
She's turning sixty this summer.
It's a universal truth that whenever you set out to find something in a complex environment with enough variables, you will find the evidence to support your thesis (deliberately or not overlooking the evidence that does not).
The debate, though is very rewarding.
Slashdot Mirror
DVCS does not mean anti-centralized. DVCS does not introduce arguments between developers, rather ameliorating them as it's easier to try things out and becoming more knowledgeable before discussing issues. It's about how to define the build and release systems. Obviously, you need a 'head revision' or 'release branch' or whatever you want to name the code that's defined as the one version that makes up the product. Having input from different places makes no difference on the release part of the process. Developers move the changes to the release/central build version just like they would with the old model. Almost all resistance I've seen so far is something similar to 'I don't like this because I have to learn something new' obfuscated behind a bunch of misconceptions.
There's nothing that suggests that centralized version control and corporate go hand in hand. A common misconception if you ask me, using a DVCS in every day work in a large corporate environment.... or ask sun for that matter. It's absolutely possible to have central release versions with DVCS, it's all about work flow practices.
git tutorial: 592 000 hits mercurial tutorial: 1 080 000 hits Am I missing something?
No, you probably are not going to go to google, but who are you going to? Is a license going to get you what you want *really*? Will you be able to affect their next release? Maybe, but surely not "right now". If the connection's down for instance you won't be able to send mail "right now" either. If you're asking for reliability, what exactly makes you think desktop will provide that in a better way? I for one surely don't feel that I'm in control working with proprietary software as I cannot affect it in any way.
Yeah, Zappa was a true genious. Another thing he said back in the seventies IIRC, was something in the lines of "sometime in the future, the bulk of new music will consist of recycled ideas". And look, we got sampling a number of years later. Today, the number of true musical innovation creations topping the charts steadily dwindle.
On her PC. I helped her install it, just told her it's a free operating system, just as good as windows. She's been satisfied with it for about a year now. I didn't have to teach her a single thing, just set it up with localization. It didn't take five minutes but alot less than it would have to install windows for her. That's what I had to do. She's turning sixty this summer.
It's a universal truth that whenever you set out to find something in a complex environment with enough variables, you will find the evidence to support your thesis (deliberately or not overlooking the evidence that does not). The debate, though is very rewarding.
It's unlikey but it is possible? Stage 3, AMD64 3200+ Using it as a production system.
Obviously people don't think it's worth the money buying from the established wendors. It's percieved as unjust then it cannot be wrong.
He says can take days. Last time I did an install from scratch, it took about three hours.