RE: move s6 to github?

From: James Powell <>
Date: Tue, 21 Apr 2015 22:18:10 -0700

I think s6 is fine how it is. Currently many related projects exist on githib that can help or assist s6, but they are not developed solely on githib. Runit-for-LFS was based in GoogleCode for logistical reasons until Google pulled the plug on us.

I also see s6 not as a true Cathedral, but as a focused project with a Benevolent Dictator for Life at the helm guiding the project carefully. It is neither cathedral or bazaar, but a unit of a larger bazaar.


Sent from my Windows Phone
From: Laurent Bercot<>
Sent: ‎4/‎21/‎2015 6:24 PM
Subject: Re: move s6 to github?

On 22/04/2015 02:58, Buck Evan wrote:
> Just to set my own expectations, may I send pull requests to github, or
> must I send patches here?

  Please send patches here. Even better, please start a design discussion
about the feature/change you want before writing a patch, unless it is
very small. And above all, please don't get upset if I say no. :)
(If I say no, I will explain why.)

> I brought up the bazaar because you criticized systemd as neglecting "The
> bazaar approach that has made the free software ecosystem what it is
> today;", which made me think s6 would embrace the bazaar in contrast.

  Hm. I can see how it is misleading.

  I actually do not support bazaar as a *development model for a project*.
I believe that quality software can only be written by keeping a tight grip
on what goes in, with a clear vision about the scope and design of the project,
and that can only be achieved with very small teams. Free software following
the bazaar development model is notoriously bad at quality control.

  However, I also believe that a project scope should be limited, and I very
much support the blossoming of as many small-scope projects as can be, and
total freedom about the interfaces and communication points between all those
projects. That is what I call the bazaar approach that has made the free
software ecosystem what it is today: everybody can write software that interacts
with other software on their machine, in the way they choose. I support bazaar
as an *application creation model for an existing system*. To me, that is what
free software is about.

  systemd, unsurprisingly, gets both levels wrong. It has a large developer
base so no coherent vision and bad quality control, *and* it has an insanely
large scope and tries to enforce the use of its own interfaces for new
software development, essentially proprietarizing it.

> While I agree that lines-of-code should not grow fast, I would enjoy seeing
> user uptake grow much more quickly, and I believe that's part of your
> project goal, someday.

  Oh, yes. But users don't have to be developers.

> I think the cpython project shows that populism and restraint aren't
> mutually exclusive features.
> It's a very bazaar-oriented project, but also quite conservative about
> feature creep

  The problem with Python is not feature-creep. It's its existence in the first

Received on Wed Apr 22 2015 - 05:18:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.0 : Sun May 09 2021 - 19:44:19 UTC