X-Authentication-Warning:	delorie.com: mail set sender to geda-user-bounces using -f
X-Recipient:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
DKIM-Signature:	v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
	d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
	h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to
	:content-type;
	bh=pMk/wVJxjfhyp0F+b+huhlakCQejo0wi9lXwUGD1gVc=;
	b=hHu055PUrCh9nVxY1+Vc/pfRaVgWY7cGE3cHlBoS8QAFckeekfiz5oVva7iFAmDyRz
	dFcCFUjeIae6Nf1hVU1qUNh7l7HMQKDh8vrD2OfiWe1YuPj4iKCD580oFwoXhfe/ylc5
	floNt+rQ3+nLAZWqwxbkbb/6b7F0nXMdMUFgpw1jTDXWYcQSr7ckBPBQHchtdOQZS3bR
	WAx3+49Qze4g/gTVmScwQXWlhd6g1wWWwIKZzkbitmqV+jKAv0TNuC8fUgNT9QykIwrz
	6wB9YK4eGdTcGnT1vIkVOFCIWrnrfyollh/YrDyOE88m88FUTPyCVl0NcKUeRw0bO0H8
	HXsw==
MIME-Version:	1.0
In-Reply-To:	<F3B81D9B-82F1-4F13-8DED-93BD106C5414@jump-ing.de>
References:	<CANqhZFxYH+Y5U1ai7ey-s+4nz6eYDM2vx3aMDb7WuigNXmi4AQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<50892DC8 DOT 6080308 AT laserlinc DOT com>
	<201210251629 DOT q9PGTfes029100 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>
	<50897B77 DOT 1030401 AT laserlinc DOT com>
	<201210251859 DOT q9PIxw7n004895 AT envy DOT delorie DOT com>
	<F720A597-665F-40D1-B1A4-E02506EE5D09 AT jump-ing DOT de>
	<CAGde_xNNrA-QMcXiNQJEkPSfFGeZWLyULAqh0pZfkPAV898NQQ AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<8CD82772-DF1C-4C82-852C-B9F6A094CBAA AT jump-ing DOT de>
	<CAGde_xNtp8tb82kiggdzbq-3X7zMY5sHu5TS7dLxJooX3K-pFA AT mail DOT gmail DOT com>
	<F3B81D9B-82F1-4F13-8DED-93BD106C5414 AT jump-ing DOT de>
Date:	Fri, 26 Oct 2012 21:28:01 +0200
Message-ID:	<CAGde_xM=x5P5yiSMQ0wTGaCATdToY-TcYbcoNTxh1E_m4Ky9tg@mail.gmail.com>
Subject:	Re: [geda-user] The state of gEDA/gaf
From:	Svenn Are Bjerkem <svenn DOT bjerkem AT googlemail DOT com>
To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Reply-To:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
Errors-To:	nobody AT delorie DOT com
X-Mailing-List:	geda-user AT delorie DOT com
X-Unsubscribes-To:	listserv AT delorie DOT com

On 26 October 2012 16:04, Markus Hitter <mah AT jump-ing DOT de> wrote:
> Am 26.10.2012 um 14:16 schrieb Svenn Are Bjerkem:
>
>> and that I do not know what kind of patches or
>> repositories we are talking about. With "remote repo" I understand
>> stuff on github or any other place but git.geda-project.org.
>
>
> Exactly. Searching at github.com for "geda" finds no less than 160 forks.
> Some even from people with commit access to geda's own repository. And there
> are even more fork on other sites.
>
> I'm not talking about this in public, these people could feel like I point
> with my finger towards them and shy away even more.

I got curious and headed over to have a look at the misery. It turns
out that there are 14 projects forked off of geda-gaf in there. Found
some regulars, yes, but I also found that they just slipped into the
clone of git.geda-project.org. Most of the forks have their master
already pushed into git.geda-project.org so I ended up with two forks
with genuine master data compared to G-P. I do not count genuine
branches found on the forks as I expect those to have been merged back
into master in case they were successful. Unfortunately it seems that
rebasing has been the favourite tool, and that leaves the working
branches dangling seemingly helpless and forgotten.

Looking at the geda-gaf fork from Peter Brett, I think that's the way
the whole project should have been run: People without commit access
make a fork, implement code/bug/fix and push it back to their own
branch. The interested soul add the fork as a remote and test the
code/bug/fix in his local work tree. When the work is done, a pull
request is pushed to the overlords controlling the mainline for audit.
Good stuff is then put on top of master and the cycle starts again. As
long as all the forks out there have the same SHA as mother,
overlaying code is a breeze.

I'm going to have a look at all the other geda forks to see what they
really try to provide. I think most of the forks are just result of
the mainline geda development not being up to date with modern chaotic
development methods.


-- 
Svenn

- Raw text -