Kamujin's picture

Should we create an OpenTK Mirror?

In light of the impass we seem to be at with regard to contributing to the SVN, I am trying to think of other options. I am very reluctant to fork the code as I don't see much long term benefit from fragmenting such a small community.

As a compromise, I have been considering kanato's idea of creating an off-site mirror/branch for us to contribute to. Ideally, we could submit a unified patch to Fiddler at various intervals.
The down side to me seems that you won't get the proper credit for your commits and that Fiddler might find it more difficult to merge the code. If anyone has a better idea, please speak up.

I can set up this mirror. Would any of you be interested in contributing?

kanato, I'd really like to work with you to get the OS X support debugged/stable.


Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.
objarni's picture

If you do Kamujin, please use http://code.google.com since it is easier to use and faster than sf.net.

georgwaechter's picture
kanato's picture

I certainly will welcome help with the OSX support too, and having a code repository we can both commit to seems like the best way to collaborate.

Kamujin's picture

Codeplex is not SVN friendly last time I looked. I'll look at code.google.com.

Additionally, one of the reasons that I push code out as open source is to (hopefully) create prior art that can be used against patent trolls. As much as I am not a Microsoft hater, I don't trust them either.

objarni's picture

Off topic: I think .NET/C# is one the few things Microsoft did good. In general, I tend to dislike Microsoft and their "business methods".

I'd choose google anyday if forced ;)

If you want to have a look at google-code in action just check dogfight which is hosted there:

http://code.google.com/p/dogfight2008/

JTalton's picture

I'd like to avoid an OpenTK mirror. That being said, it would be nice to see more of the current plan.

I understand the thoughts behind not opening up a code repository. I find it hard to let other people modify and work with my code, especially when it is not 100% cooked. That's part of being a perfectionist, which is one of the traits that lead to a wonderful project such as OpenTK.

I would find it more reassuring to see a post saying that the SVN is only open to certain developers until a certain milestone is reached and then things will open up more. The silence is deafening.

I have gathered from different posts that Fiddler may have been busy with Real-Life and hopefully will find his way back to OpenTK development soon enough.

I am looking forward to several fixes and OSX support. If the time comes that we do need to fork, I personally prefer SourceForge. Yes it can be slow, but I feel it is more in the spirit of OpenSource than google-code or codeplex. You never know how a company like Microsoft or Google may change.

Kamujin's picture

Let me be clear. I am not advocating a fork. The idea of the mirror is just to allow those without write access to the SVN, a way to collaborate. Ideally, I think Fiddler should make a branch for us in the main SVN. This would give him the most control and still enable active participation in the project.

It may be a little petty, but I also like getting credit for my contributions. Aside from the difficulty of passing patches around, systems like Ohloh are built to work against SVN commits, not patches.

objarni's picture

JTalton has a point about sf.net being more free in spirit than codeplex or googlecode, although my confidence in google vs microsoft leans quite heavily towards google both when it comes to openness and technique.

Fiddler: what is your point of view in all this? I do find it unsettling that developers willing to spend resources developing OpenTK are not even answered with a public opinion. Even though I'm not a developer of OpenTK, I want to contribute documentation and help out in the forums. And of course share my point of view as an OpenTK user/application developer.

Of course there must be a way to work things out while keeping the OpenTK basic philisophy of minimalism and .NET idiomatics, right?

I guess my gut feeling is that this discussion has some impact on the long-term success of OpenTK.

After all, Kamujin are not asking to get write access to the main OpenTK archive, he's only asking how to more easily contribute to the development of OpenTK, for example via a separate branch in which Fiddler may "pick-and-choose" what goes into the main branch.

Or maybe it's just that Fiddler is "claiming to have a life outside OpenTK"? :)

kanato's picture

As far as I can tell, SF does not allow any fine grained control over SVN permissions. It's either give someone write access to the whole thing or no write access at all. So if someone was given write access they'd have to promise to only commit to whatever branch was assigned to them, which is something that I'd be fine with doing if I had write access to OpenTK. But that requires a lot of trust, so I can understand if Fiddler is wary about doing that.

Kamujin's picture

SVN is a versioned file system. Worst case, you revert.