This seems odd to me. Django is generally a very open and community oriented project, which strives to consult with the community and achieve a consensus, resorting to a BDFL decision when necessary, after all sides have put their case.
Maybe I wasn't following closely enough (apologies if that is the case), but my impression was that this decision was reached behind closed doors without a great deal of focussed community discussion or attempt to reach consensus. I just remember Adrian basically saying (and I'm paraphrasing here): "I've been away too long, but I'm back now and I've decided that we're moving to GitHub!" Yes, there have been threads about moving to this or that environment, but I don't remember a thread started by Django core letting the community know that a move was seriously on the cards, and giving the community a chance to have some formal input before a decision was made. Even if Django core feels that a BDFL decision will be required, I still think it is appropriate to raise such a change with the community and ask for some structured proposals, and then if necessary make a BDFL decision that shows which elements from which proposals have been blessed. There's always a possibility that the community has something to say that could sway the decision, even if Adrian or Jacob are 99% decided. And even if it doesn't change the outcome, at least there is a clear public record of the decision making process. I don't necessarily disagree with the decision that was made, but I would have liked to see more openness in the discussion and decision making process. Cheers. Tai. On Saturday, 21 April 2012 22:52:01 UTC+10, Luke Plant wrote: > > On 20/04/12 19:58, Daniel Sokolowski wrote: > > > Was BitBucket (mercurial system which is python based) not considered? > > And could someone point me to a url where I can read the discussion on > > this migration; I am rather curious why it’s happening – the current > > system works so I see no reason to fix it. > > Some of the discussion happened on django-core. > > One of the reasons for this was that it affects core developers most of > all, so Adrian wanted their opinions first. > > Another reason was that this kind of change is almost certainly going to > require a BDFL decision, because we will never come to consensus on Git > vs Mercurial etc. - even within the core developers they are strong > preferences in both directions, and even strong preferences to stick > with Subversion. And I guess that's the reason that we didn't have > further discussion on django-devs - since it already needed a BDFL > decision, there was no point making the pretence of discussion in a > wider forum. (Adrian/Jacob feel may correct me if I'm guessing wrongly). > > Luke > > -- > "My capacity for happiness you could fit into a matchbox without > taking out the matches first." (Marvin the paranoid android) > > Luke Plant || http://lukeplant.me.uk/ > > -- You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers" group. To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/django-developers/-/zZIneXzTTvcJ. To post to this group, send email to [email protected]. To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected]. For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/django-developers?hl=en.
