From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
From: "Nicholas A. Bellinger" <nab@linux-iscsi.org>
Subject: Re: [Scst-devel] Fwd: Re: linuxcon 2010...
Date: Sun, 05 Sep 2010 16:59:54 -0700
Message-ID: <1283731194.556.147.camel@haakon2.linux-iscsi.org>
References: <4C76CA57.3050405@vlnb.net>
	 <1282857806.32007.175.camel@haakon2.linux-iscsi.org>
	 <4C79484B.3090607@vlnb.net>
	 <1283028468.32007.357.camel@haakon2.linux-iscsi.org>
	 <4C7C18CE.5020103@vlnb.net>
	 <1283204792.32007.448.camel@haakon2.linux-iscsi.org>
	 <4C7FFD1A.8090509@vlnb.net>
	 <1283459158.5598.143.camel@haakon2.linux-iscsi.org>
	 <20100905201802.GC18411@core.coreip.homeip.net>
	 <1283723447.556.133.camel@haakon2.linux-iscsi.org>
	 <20100905234134.GA17212@core.coreip.homeip.net>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Return-path: <linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org>
Received: from smtp103.sbc.mail.mud.yahoo.com ([68.142.198.202]:22206 "HELO
	smtp103.sbc.mail.mud.yahoo.com" rhost-flags-OK-OK-OK-OK)
	by vger.kernel.org with SMTP id S1754270Ab0IFADy (ORCPT
	<rfc822;linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org>); Sun, 5 Sep 2010 20:03:54 -0400
In-Reply-To: <20100905234134.GA17212@core.coreip.homeip.net>
Sender: linux-scsi-owner@vger.kernel.org
List-Id: linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org
To: Dmitry Torokhov <dmitry.torokhov@gmail.com>
Cc: Vladislav Bolkhovitin <vst@vlnb.net>, James Bottomley <James.Bottomley@suse.de>, Dirk Meister <dmeister@uni-paderborn.de>, linux-scsi@vger.kernel.org, Chetan Loke <chetanloke@gmail.com>, Chetan Loke <generationgnu@yahoo.com>, scst-devel <scst-devel@lists.sourceforge.net>, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org, Mike Christie <michaelc@cs.wisc.edu>, FUJITA Tomonori <fujita.tomonori@lab.ntt.co.jp>

On Sun, 2010-09-05 at 16:41 -0700, Dmitry Torokhov wrote:
> On Sun, Sep 05, 2010 at 02:50:47PM -0700, Nicholas A. Bellinger wrote:
> > Anyways, if we are going to compare SCM distributed vs. centralized
> > workflow in terms of kernel projects, lets please at least compare
> > apples to apples here.
> > 
> 
> No, we should not be comparing SCMs at all here but rather 2 competing
> implementations based on quality of the code. You tried to bring SMC
> angle in and I am saying that it is BS.
> 

Again, without getting into another pointless flamewar,  I think the
main point here is that a open source project using a distributed
workflow (like git) has major advantages when it comes to working with a
larger group of developers than a centralized model (like SVN) does.

Because being a subsystem maintainer typically involves this type of
complex workflow involving lots of different parties, git is a tool that
was created (originally) expressely for a kernel workflow, and for those
types of people it works really, really well.

So, please understand that code and project workflow is only one of the
reasons why TCM/LIO v4 was selected over SCST.   I invite you to take a
closer look at the RFC Code that has been posted last week if you want
to get into the nitty-gritty techinical details, which this thread has
thus far been avoiding.

Best,

--nab