[openib-general] Plans for libibverbs 1.0, 1.1 and beyond

[Roland Dreier]

    Bryan> It means that someone is going to have to integrate changes
    Bryan> from your git tree into the SVN repo.  Is this something
    Bryan> you're willing to do, for example?

I don't see that as a requirement at all.  If you want to look at my
development tree, you pull the git tree.  That gives you a lot more
information than subversion: you get to see all of my branches and the
merges between them, rather than the artificially linearized svn history.

If you want a stable release, then take the 1.0, 1.0.1, etc tarballs
that I will release.  I'm also happy to produce daily snapshots of
whatever branches people are interested in tracking.

    Bryan> However, let me switch hats again.  If we want to get a 1.0
    Bryan> release out the door in a reasonable time frame, this is
    Bryan> not a good time to be having a barney over the choice of
    Bryan> SCM to use.  For example, I'd be almost as unhappy with git
    Bryan> as I am with SVN, due to its user interface and resource
    Bryan> hogginess.

I think you're misunderstanding what I was proposing.  I was not
suggesting that svn at openib.org be turned off or anything like that,
simply that one component move to a SCM that works better for me (the
libibverbs maintainer).  Right now the monolithic svn repo confuses
things and makes it seem like there are dependencies between
components when there actually aren't.

We'll never reach consensus on a new SCM, so I think it's better if
each component maintainer can decide what works best.

    Bryan> Unless a lot of other people are all excited about the idea
    Bryan> of ditching SVN, I think we should hold our noses and stick
    Bryan> with it for 1.0.  We can start a conversation about moving
    Bryan> post-1.0 development to a DSCM (and perhaps even make the
    Bryan> move itself) in parallel, while we go through the 1.0
    Bryan> release motions.

I definitely wouldn't switch repositories until libibverbs 1.0 is out.  

Anyway, it seems that the users of the repository really want
everything to stay the way it is, so I guess I'll drop this plan for
now.  Sigh...

 - R.