Re: [PATCH/POLL] git-format-patch: the default suffix is now .patch, not .txt

[Andreas Ericsson <ae@op5.se>]

Shawn O. Pearce wrote:
> Andreas Ericsson <ae@op5.se> wrote:
>> Would a +46-31 number work? If so, you could give me a call when you're
>> having trouble. I'd probably end up asking the list, or bribing Junio
>> with beer to answer for me, but the fee would be low (how much is a
>> dozen beers in Japan?), so perhaps it'd be worth it ;-)
> 
> Heh.  The thing is, with me "on staff" I doubt you can get much
> better support.  I know Git very well, almost as well as Linus,
> Junio, Nico, and Johannes (sorry, no particular order there).
> What I don't know off the top of my head, I know where the source
> code for it is, and I can read and understand it rather quickly.
> 

Ya, I knows. :)

> When something breaks, I can usually fix it myself, and that usually
> results in a patch to Junio just hours after I discover the problem.
> Most of the time the patch is worthy of inclusion and Junio picks
> it up.  You can't get that kind of response from a commerical vendor,
> at least not without forking over bucket loads of cash first.
> 
> The problem is, the organization has strict rules about recommending
> yourself as a vendor.  But recommending a guy half way around the
> world who works for beer is probably in compliance.  :-)
>  

That was my devilishly clever plan; To provide support to someone who
knows the thing I'm supposed to support a lot better than myself, while
getting some free beer in the process ;-)

>> On a serious note, it's probably about time the world saw its first
>> commercial git support company. It's legal to package and sell GPL'd
>> code. Many companies have already proven that it can be a very
>> lucrative business.
> 
> I've thought about doing this myself.  I'm just so short on time
> that developing a business providing support would probably push me
> way over the edge.  Ideally I'd love to have such a venture make its
> money off support contracts and a small markup on dead-tree forms of
> open-source Git documentation.  I'd also love to see such a venture
> be able to support a Git developer or two full-time, making sure that
> all of their work is getting folded back into the main git.git tree.
> Which of course implies they can't be heading off in directions
> that the rest of the group finds useless/pointless/stupid/etc.
> 
> Wishful thinking.  Back to reality.
> 

This is a case where "Think Big" isn't enough, and you need to "Think
Bigger". Don't settle for shipping help-docs on git and answering the
phone. Sell pre-packaged versions of git, with a pre-installed Linux
server with raided disks and a nifty backup-solution (just sell a second
server and use an update-hook to replicate everything to that one, then
you're done). You could easily charge up to $2,500 / user for providing
"A fully integrated VCS / backup solution, with full failover to ensure
100% efficiency in your day-to-day job". Tack on another 10k for the
two servers and another 1k / dev to go to a training seminar and you're
good to go.

-- 
Andreas Ericsson                   andreas.ericsson@op5.se
OP5 AB                             www.op5.se
Tel: +46 8-230225                  Fax: +46 8-230231