I've nothing against tarballs and I'm not saying that there shouldn't be tarballs. I'm also not saying that repository could work as release distribution which it's not and I never said so. All I'm saying is that there also should be a source code repository with full commit history so that each code change could be reviewed. Tarballs only provide current source code, but not changesets which are very important. It seems like you're very ignorant and don't know what is right tool for right job. Do you really expect for people diff over 100 tarball releases to find which version introduced some bug or changed something on which you relied? Why do you think I asked for repository? because I was intending to contribute. Linux kernel uses git repository and that works perfectly fine.
2014-04-18 19:37 GMT+03:00 Jim Reid <j...@rfc1035.com>: > On 18 Apr 2014, at 16:47, Dāvis Mosāns <davis...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > I couldn't find Postfix source code repository, I saw only tarballs. > > Source control (SCM/VCS) is a MUST have. It's unbelievable that people > just > > work with tarballs without proper source control. > > It's unbelievable that kids these days see every software > development/maintenance task as something that must get crushed under a > git-shaped sledgehammer regardless of whether that's the reasonable or > sensible thing to do. [Resistance is futile. Your code will be > assimilated.] Has it not dawned on you that the reason something like git > is not provided might be that it is simply the wrong tool for the job? > > You are of course free to take the tarballs and feed them into the version > control repository of your choice. That does not mean everyone else who > works on postfix is obliged to work with whatever is your flavour of the > month VCS. BTW, what contributions have you actually made to postfix? > > > It doesn't matter which you use, but it must be available. > > Why? The author of postfix gets to choose/control how others commit code. > Put simply, it's Wietse's ball and he decides who can play with it and what > they are allowed to do with it. You don't. One of the reasons why postfix > has remained in good shape for ~20 years is because well-intentioned but > clueless people don't get to throw in features or or chase passing fads or > ride their personal hobby-horses. The most successful (and vital) open > source projects operate in this way too. That's not a coincidence. > > It will be a very sad day when someone is obliged to use git or subversion > or... to get access to open source software. For 99%+ of the users, 99%+ of > the time, all that's needed is to download a tarball -- kids, ask your dad > about FTP -- unpack it and run make. Anything else is unnecessary overkill. > That lesson appears to be lost on the next generation. > > > Sending patches over email is what people did last century... > > So what? It ain't broke and therefore doesn't need fixing. Especially by > bloatware like git. Tools like that have their place -- projects with a > cast of thousands perhaps (monkeys and typewriters spring to mind) -- but > IMO postfix is not one of them. > > >
