[sldev] [POLICY] Development by consensus (Re: Question regarding upcoming maintenance on 11/27-11/28)

[Dzonatas]

Rob Lanphier wrote:
>> There's a lot of room between "going ahead without discussion" and
>> "putting everything up to a vote".
>>     
>
> There's also a lot of room between "open community development model"
> and "closed development model".  We're about as open as any market
> leading company out there....

Linux is a good community model to study being that it is open and 
closed at different development stages, yet Linux still remains open in 
the end.

> Nothing is carved in granite.  This is software.  Yes, a fair amount of
> engineering effort has been spent, but I think it's going to be much
> easier to have an informed debate once we get some test software out there.
>
>   

"Test software"... ah, yes...

Linux is hardly monolithic like Second Life. I find it harder to work on 
SL source than the Linux kernel. There is something about the layout of 
Linux that just works. It is especially easy to compile parts and test 
those parts without the need to recompile everything. Perhaps, to 
compare Linux and SL is to say the Linux is more modular. That modular 
aspect makes development much easier. As a monolithic build and 
installation, there is no easy way to push code forward without it being 
dependently merged together for a release. As we find with Linux, parts 
of it can be released and merged separately much easier. This is not a 
complaint, but do consider the feel for developers that don't get 
immediate access to the main merges. Of course, Torvalds has stated his 
dissent for SVN based merges. I like SVN, yet it shows that Torvalds 
also has an edge in his tried and tested development model that has gone 
a long way. Anything worth to consider?

-- 
Power to Change the Void
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.secondlife.com/pipermail/sldev/attachments/20071126/b0317e03/attachment.htm