Shaking-up Subversion by Listening to the User Community and thenCommitting to do the Work.

E

Elaine

http://blogs.wandisco.com/2010/12/2...community-and-then-committing-to-do-the-work/

Today we announced the radical step to overhaul the Subversion project
by actually fixing and improving several areas that Subversion users
have been crying out for.

I know that this will generate criticism from fans of distributed
version control (GIT) because some of the issues we going to tackle
are the stick with which they beat Subversion. I am sure we will face
cynicism from some factions of the Subversion project, but in some
cases this is because of commercial interests that are dependent on
the perception that they are the ones developing Subversion.

As the saying goes: you can’t make an omelet without breaking eggs.

We are not doing this for direct commercial reasons. We are doing this
to protect the future of Subversion. We are doing this because we
care. We are doing this because we need to. We are doing this because
it is the right thing to do.

I’m sure there are lots of questions. Here is a selection of those I
have tried to answer:

What Does This Mean? Are You Forking Subversion?

At this point, NO. We don’t believe that it is necessary. What we are
doing is committing our resources to develop several features that
both WANdisco and our user community believe are critical to both the
long and short-term welfare of the Subversion project.

Hang on a Minute! Didn’t the Community Just Announce A Road Map?

Yes they did, but that’s pretty much all that happened (and that
really pisses us off.) The commit logs (code committed by developers
to the project) tell the real story. We are not happy with the volume,
speed or participation on the project right now. Blogging, or
answering questions on user lists are important, but so is writing
source code. We also believe it’s unhelpful when certain unscrupulous
committers decide to commit trivial changes in large files to simply
get their stats up. That behavior has no place in any open source
project; it’s a bad form and wastes everyone’s valuable time.

The requirements that we are committing to build, namely merging and
branching, are not new. Many of these have been in the mainstream and
documented since 2007. I find it more than a little annoying that,
given their importance to many Subversion users; these areas have not
been tackled.

Yes, they are difficult. Yes, they will take time. That is why a
corporation needs to step up to the plate and commit to deliver.

What Does WANdisco Get From This?

We have a thriving business. Almost all of our customers are
Subversion users and, frankly, we’re biased. A bit like Henry Ford’s
choice of car color, that’s how we see SCM: You can have any SCM so
long as it’s Subversion. Do the math. It is really simple: The more
[happy] Subversion users – the more potential customers for WANdisco
and, yes, then we make money.

Who Attended This Summit at the WANdisco Offices?

We invited in the region of 10 companies, representing the largest
implementations in the world, some with up to 40,000 users. We
selected the organizations based on a very significant vested interest
and, due to their complexity; any problems or issues would be
magnified exponentially. Of course, everyone had their own special
requests that were very specific to their situation but there was also
a common theme: branching and merging must improve.

I can’t name all those that attended but they are companies of similar
standing to Intel and Juniper Networks.

I Would Like to Help, Can I?

Absolutely!

Hyrum Wright is managing this process he can be contacted at
Hyrum.Wright(at) WANdisco [dot] com. We will work with ANYONE. In
fact, we would prefer that this be a community effort. Time is of the
essence. Let’s not waste time in endless debate. Let’s act together.

Subversion is a Community. How is this Working with a Community?

Ultimately, the community will decide if this work will be accepted.
When Google decided that httpv2 (awful name and description by the
way) was a good idea they developed it and presented it to the
community. It was not a fait accompli . It made sense, so it was
accepted. In this case, the requirements have been out there for
several years. Subversion users have been tweeting, blogging and
complaining about branching and merging. We held a summit to discuss
what needed to be done with the Subversion users. This was their
number 1 requirement! We are doing this for the wider Subversion
community.


Are You Guys Trying to Take Over The Subversion Project?

Subversion is an Apache project, ideally it should not be inside a
corporation.

After This, Then What?

We are still calibrating the requirements, but one hypothesis may be
to completely upgrade the backend of Subversion. This is definitely
not the end – we still have lots more to do.
 

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments. After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.

Ask a Question

Members online

No members online now.

Forum statistics

Threads
473,769
Messages
2,569,582
Members
45,059
Latest member
cryptoseoagencies

Latest Threads

Top