[DRE-maint] Regarding your comment in my blog (re: Ruby Gems)

[Richard Hurt]

On Dec 9, 2008, at 11:59 AM| Dec 9, 2008, Micah Anderson wrote:

> * Richard Hurt <rnhurt at kangaroobox.com> [2008-12-09 11:32-0500]:
>>
>>  - Is there any thought around moving to Git?
>
> Its funny because some people say opposite things: that Git is way too
> hard and that Subversion is the more accessible revision control
> mechanism which would enable more people to get involved quicker.
>
> I dont want to start a VCS war or anything, but I just wanted to point
> out that the Git learning curve is very steep for a lot of people, but
> if switching to Git from SVN would mean a closer collaboration with
> upstream Ruby Gem packaging, then it seems like it would be a win. I  
> am
> somewhat skeptical that there is a tangible benefit for doing so,  
> but I
> like Git too...

Actually, I agree that CVS/SVN is easier to get started with than  
Git.  However, the long term benefits of Git are much greater.  Heck  
I'm just now beginning to break myself of the "branches are evil!"  
mindeset and have started to dip my toe a little deeper in the Git  
pool.  So far, so good.

> Putting all Debian's rubygems into GitHub would require paying money  
> for
> this service, when Debian has infrastructure for hosting git
> repositories. I dont really think that its necessary to switch to  
> using
> GitHub, but its quite trivial for someone to send their stuff up to
> GitHub, if they desire to do so, and Git is being used.

Agreed.  GitHub is great for some things, but we should use Debian  
resources where possible.

>>  - Why are we still using mailman and not something more flexible?
>
> This strikes me as kind of funny. Googlegroups is a modern OSS tool? I
> personally find Googlegroups to be frustrating and annoying for
> non-Google users to subscribe/post. Using it through GMANE is a
> nightmare, there is no NOMAIL option for individual users, you have to
> get the list admin to do it.
>
> I have much less confidence that switching away from MailMan to
> GoogleGroups will have a tangible benefit. Is it so hard to  
> subscribe to
> a MailMan list? After you have subscribed, what is the barrier here?
> Seriously, I am baffled about this one.

The big thing for me was visibility.  Its hard to intelligently search  
for old messages and browsing them once you find them is not pretty.   
Heck, I even had a hard time finding the archive in the first place.   
I don't specifically like or dislike Google Groups but Usenet was  
designed for this type of discussion and GG sure do make it easy to  
navigate.

>> - How can we make it easier to onboard people and projects?
>
> I was half expecting that the next assertion was going to be that
> everyone has to switch to TextMate and Mac OS X, because these are
> modern OSS tools.
>
> I think its a good idea to try and get more involvement from the Ruby
> community, and get more people involved. However, I am very suspicious
> that switching away from MailMan is going to bring in a rush of
> people....

No, but making the onbaording process simple and clear would at least  
not scare people away.  I guess my frustration stems from the fact  
that all the tools we are using are completely separate with nothing  
tying them together.  For instance, we have Gforge on the front end,  
mailman for the mailing lists, SVN to handle the code, and to top it  
all off the main site is a wiki hosted somewhere else.  None of these  
tools work together and there is almost nothing tying them to each  
other.

One suggestion is that we move everything to Gforge.  It should be  
able to handle mailing lists, code versioning, documentation, and bug  
tracking and if it can't then we should look elsewhere.

Later...
   Richard