Yes, businesses do go under. Look at Cyclic. We've spent more on BK
development than they made in their entire history.
If _you_, my friend, and all of your buddies had been throwing money at
Cyclic, then perhaps they would have had the resources to solve the hard
problems (and believe me, they are hard).
CVS has had 10 years or so to get it right and they didn't. And you didn't
help, in spite of your assertions that it is "a very insignificant problem".
> > Don't you think it is a little unfair to get people interested in
> > infrastructure that you have no intention of supporting at commercial
> > levels? What happens when you get interested in something else?
>
> Do you think any of us here care? Many of us are here, supporting a
> non-commercial project, at non-commercial levels. I think you just
> insulted most of us.
Uh huh. Sure.
> > I watch the Aegis source tree and I'm not seeing this huge wave of
> > development coming in from the free software crowd, so that means I
> > need to depend on you.
>
> Get a few core developers here behind it (which would happen by necessity,
> since people here would need improvements and modifications too), and I
> see this as a very insignificant problem.
I'm sure you do. Perhaps that is some indication of your incredible
grasp of the difficulties involved.
> > Are you going to make this work on all platforms? Where's the NT,
> > Windows/98, Mac, etc., ports? Etc.
>
> Refer to my previous comment about caring. I doubt many people doing
> serious Linux development give a damn if there's a Windows 98/NT/2000
> port.
Yes they do. That Windows garbage will generate the revenue to make the
product better and to make other products. All of which the Linux
community gets for free. So it's true they don't care directly, but
somebody has to do the work and if Windows ends up paying to make Linux
get better tools, are you seriously going to suggest that people are
going to be unhappy with that?
> Or did you miss the original subject (you know, that part about a -Linux-
> project management system?), and choose to simply plow on with your
> marketing spiel whilst belittling someone who produces a competing product
> to yours for free?
I'm not belittling anyone. I'm holding Peter accountable, just as he would
hold me accountable if the situation were reversed. If he wants to step
up to the plate with a real solution, why hasn't he? I'm not the guy who
started this thread, nor am I the guy with the market spiel. I was happily
working on code when this started and I'll be hapily working on code when
it is done.
Look, I don't really care who solves problems, I only care that they
get solved. If I thought that Aegis could do the job, I would have
encouraged its use myself. And that is still the case. If Peter could
produce a product which Linus thinks solves the problems, well, hell,
that frees me and my team up to go do something else. Like clusters,
which are a ton sexier than source management. But I'm sick to death
of people saying "Oh, this system could solve the problem" when that
isn't true.
Just out of curiousity, Edward, what's the biggest project you've managed
under Aegis? What are the advantages and disadvantages of the system in
your experience?
----- Larry McVoy lm@bitmover.com http://www.bitmover.com/lm- To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe linux-kernel" in the body of a message to majordomo@vger.rutgers.edu Please read the FAQ at http://www.tux.org/lkml/