The Wrapper Project
simo at samba.org
Wed Nov 20 12:47:55 MST 2013
On Wed, 2013-11-20 at 19:59 +0100, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 20, 2013 at 01:23:33PM -0500, Simo wrote:
> > On Wed, 2013-11-20 at 19:09 +0100, Jelmer Vernooij wrote:
> > For a lot of time it was just hacking around to see if it would work.
> > Some times that approach works better, and I am certain in this case
> > did, because it would have been unacceptable to the samba community to
> > break "make test" to do experiments.
> Nobody is objecting to Andreas' taking this code and hacking on it.
Ok, I had the wrong impression, apologies.
> > Besides Andreas goal was also to make this code stand on its own, and
> > that's certainly easier if you develop it on its own.
> > I really do not see why this is a big deal to be honest. Why does it
> > make any difference how the code was built ?
> Andreas is proposing moving a chunk of code out of the Samba codebase
> taking over maintenance of it, removing it from Samba and having Samba
> depend on that code. 
> This means that code to which everybody in the Samba team could easily
> contribute to previously is now harder to edit, harder to follow, and changes
> to it are no longer necessarily audited.
Oh please, what's hard in pulling a git tree ?
You might have had a point 10 years ago about it being harder, but I do
not think it is a good reason these days.
However moving that code outside of the main samba.git tree does
guarantee one thing, that a samba developer will not sneak a change in
it in the middle of huge patch-sets for totally unrelated code that
breaks all other projects that depend on it. Because the change has to
be submitted to the upstream project that will look at it from an
independent pov. IE *better* review for that specific change touching
code used by a larger audience.
> > What difference does it make if you get a review request of 200 patches
> > that basically reworks completely most of the code or a request to
> > review something of equal size with a git tree somewhere else ?
> > Sound like you are offended that some code was done on someone's own
> > without your knowledge, is that the problem ?
> No, I'm objecting to the suggested changes *to Samba* on the grounds that it
> makes it harder for me to make changes to and follow the evolution of a piece
> of code that I originally wrote.
Lèse Majesté, I see, ok.
More information about the samba-technical