Making Jiri's fork the official fork

[i***@gmail.com]

Please tell me the degree to which open-watcom-v2 on GitHub.com diverges from ow_daily.tar.bz2. Are the changes to ow_daily.tar.bz2 being merged into open-watcom-v2?

I am very excited to see that OW is being actively developed, but am concerned about the appearance that there are two groups of contributors who appear to be working at cross purposes.

It appears that 99% of OW development work is being done by Jiri. If that is true, why don't we all get behind him by making his fork on GitHub the official fork?

The main obstacles might be (1) egos and (2) donated server politics. From a technical pov, IMO the contents of ow_daily.tar.bz2 should be frozen, with all new development done using Jiri's repository.

I'd like to hear from people who are currently actively contributing and also from past contributors who might become active again if interpersonal and/or other issues could be resolved.

Jiri and I have very different approaches to code development. We are polar opposites. Over the 15 years that I have been crafting the source code for IPDOS (tm), my policy has been to always stop making changes as soon as I know that a bug exists. I fix the bug right away, and then I resume crafting. Jiri, like many prolific coders, does not work that way. He prefers to drive forward to reach his development goal quickly. Although he tries to avoid introducing bugs, his focus is to get finished with whatever enhancement or port he is working on, and he views the task of finding and fixing the bugs that he introduced as either someone else's problem or as something he will take care of in a future project.

Both ways of working are reasonable. Both, IMO, are needed. What concerns me is that Jiri's approach seems to have alienated other would-be contributors who approach code craftwork more the way that I do, which is to go more slowly and to take the time to thoroughly test and debug as you go.

We need both kinds of contributors, and we need all contributors, of either kind, to be working together. Please join me by contributing to Jiri's fork and by making Jiri's fork the de-facto official development effort for OW. If you are concerned about the bugs that are being introduced by Jiri's whirlwind coding effort, join me in assisting Jiri by working to find and eliminate those bugs.


Refs:
https://github.com/open-watcom/open-watcom-v2
ftp://ftp.openwatcom.org/source/ow_daily.tar.bz2

[Paul S. Person]

Post by i***@gmail.com
Please tell me the degree to which open-watcom-v2 on GitHub.com diverges from ow_daily.tar.bz2. Are the changes to ow_daily.tar.bz2 being merged into open-watcom-v2?
I am very excited to see that OW is being actively developed, but am concerned about the appearance that there are two groups of contributors who appear to be working at cross purposes.
It appears that 99% of OW development work is being done by Jiri. If that is true, why don't we all get behind him by making his fork on GitHub the official fork?
The main obstacles might be (1) egos and (2) donated server politics. From a technical pov, IMO the contents of ow_daily.tar.bz2 should be frozen, with all new development done using Jiri's repository.

You are right about "egos". I can't formulated a sensible response.
Jiri's attempts to "improve" wgml are too recent.

Our server is, as I understand it, paid for by Perforce, presumably
because they see some value in our efforts. Is that what you mean by
"donated"?

Post by i***@gmail.com
I'd like to hear from people who are currently actively contributing and also from past contributors who might become active again if interpersonal and/or other issues could be resolved.

IIRC, Jiri left us. If he wants to come back, he is free to do so --
provided, of course, he actually tests his changes before committing
them.

Post by i***@gmail.com
Jiri and I have very different approaches to code development. We are polar opposites. Over the 15 years that I have been crafting the source code for IPDOS (tm), my policy has been to always stop making changes as soon as I know that a bug exists. I fix the bug right away, and then I resume crafting. Jiri, like many prolific coders, does not work that way. He prefers to drive forward to reach his development goal quickly. Although he tries to avoid introducing bugs, his focus is to get finished with whatever enhancement or port he is working on, and he views the task of finding and fixing the bugs that he introduced as either someone else's problem or as something he will take care of in a future project.

When he was "improving" wgml, it soon became apparent that actually
understanding the code he was "improving" was not part of his program.
So much for trying to avoid introducing bugs.

Post by i***@gmail.com
Both ways of working are reasonable. Both, IMO, are needed. What concerns me is that Jiri's approach seems to have alienated other would-be contributors who approach code craftwork more the way that I do, which is to go more slowly and to take the time to thoroughly test and debug as you go.

What has alienated /me/ is his failure to test properly. And his
insistence on his style being the only allowed style, as revealed in
his efforts to "improve" wgml.

This is not to say that everything he did was bad; but the good parts
were the most trivial parts, where any damage was minimal and easily
corrected.

The irony is, had he asked, there /are/ parts of wgml that could stand
being pounded on some more. And there are still quite a few items that
are not yet implemented. But asking where help is needed is, it
appears, not Jiri's way either.

And I have been known to keep my focus on one problem even as related
(uncovered) bugs pile up. I just try not to commit the changes until
those bugs are taken care of. This requires a lot of testing and other
boring activities.

Post by i***@gmail.com
We need both kinds of contributors, and we need all contributors, of either kind, to be working together. Please join me by contributing to Jiri's fork and by making Jiri's fork the de-facto official development effort for OW. If you are concerned about the bugs that are being introduced by Jiri's whirlwind coding effort, join me in assisting Jiri by working to find and eliminate those bugs.

It was very hard to keep up with Jiri when he was "improving" wgml.

If you want to spend the rest of your life cleaning up Jiri's little
coding messes, feel free. I prefer to actually do something useful,
such as implementing our wgml.

[i***@gmail.com]

Having two competing repositories isn't necessarily a bad thing if they both use the same infrastructure. What do you think about GitHub versus Perforce? Is 1.9 on Perforce for historical reasons or because people would choose Perforce over GitHub if the choice was made today?

Interpersonal issues can be resolved, but first IMO the technical factor that keeps the two factions separate should be eliminated. GitHub appears to be the way forward. WDYT about moving 1.9 to GitHub? That would remove the balkanization by putting both factions on the same infrastructure, which would make it much easier for each faction to take small, incremental steps toward working together.

[Wilton Helm]

I haven't worked with GitHub, but I have projects that use Git. I prefer
Perforce's file oriented revision control to Gits global one, and Perforce's
"check out/check in" to Git's "resolve the conflicts" approach, particularly
when several developers are working on different files at the same time.
With Git, I constantly having to refresh even though the files I happen to
be working on aren't being used by anyone else.

The biggest issue with Perforce, though, is that they are hosting us. This
is in exchange for showcasing us as an example of a large project managed on
their RCS. If we stop using heir RCS, then we would need a new host.

Wilton

<***@gmail.com> wrote in message news:4c72a206-175e-4330-a1cf-***@googlegroups.com...
Having two competing repositories isn't necessarily a bad thing if they both
use the same infrastructure. What do you think about GitHub versus
Perforce? Is 1.9 on Perforce for historical reasons or because people would
choose Perforce over GitHub if the choice was made today?

Interpersonal issues can be resolved, but first IMO the technical factor
that keeps the two factions separate should be eliminated. GitHub appears
to be the way forward. WDYT about moving 1.9 to GitHub? That would remove
the balkanization by putting both factions on the same infrastructure, which
would make it much easier for each faction to take small, incremental steps
toward working together.

[Paul S. Person]

Just a note from my experience on more contentious newgroups ...

He didn't respond to me, only to himself.

If he doesn't respond to you, treating him as a troll might be a
reasonable thing to do.

On Wed, 22 Apr 2015 09:49:04 -0600, "Wilton Helm"

Post by Wilton Helm
I haven't worked with GitHub, but I have projects that use Git. I prefer
Perforce's file oriented revision control to Gits global one, and Perforce's
"check out/check in" to Git's "resolve the conflicts" approach, particularly
when several developers are working on different files at the same time.
With Git, I constantly having to refresh even though the files I happen to
be working on aren't being used by anyone else.
The biggest issue with Perforce, though, is that they are hosting us. This
is in exchange for showcasing us as an example of a large project managed on
their RCS. If we stop using heir RCS, then we would need a new host.
Wilton
Having two competing repositories isn't necessarily a bad thing if they both
use the same infrastructure. What do you think about GitHub versus
Perforce? Is 1.9 on Perforce for historical reasons or because people would
choose Perforce over GitHub if the choice was made today?
Interpersonal issues can be resolved, but first IMO the technical factor
that keeps the two factions separate should be eliminated. GitHub appears
to be the way forward. WDYT about moving 1.9 to GitHub? That would remove
the balkanization by putting both factions on the same infrastructure, which
would make it much easier for each faction to take small, incremental steps
toward working together.

[i***@gmail.com]

I apparently didn't click on the correct reply button. IMO, your suggestion that I be treated as a troll is unjustifiably hostile. For God's sake, man, I didn't say anything troll-like, so why even raise the idea?

[Paul S. Person]

Post by i***@gmail.com
I apparently didn't click on the correct reply button. IMO, your suggestion that I be treated as a troll is unjustifiably hostile. For God's sake, man, I didn't say anything troll-like, so why even raise the idea?

I acknowledge the justice of your complaint, withdraw the suggestion,
and apologize for any offense.

That said, the answer to your question is, that you are attracting the
(justified, based on his observed behavior) same attitude as I hold
for Jiri.

[i***@gmail.com]

Apology accepted, and thank you for your exceptional grace in giving it. I don't know much about Jiri except for these two things: (1) His binaries work on my computers and the 1.9 binaries do not. (2) Jiri, like me, has no interest in becoming entangled or engaged in discussions and conflicts. He appears to be truly intellectually engaged with crafting code, and such intellectual engagement is precious and should be encouraged and facilitated.

Yesterday, my backpack containing my laptop was stolen. I am currently preoccupied with this disaster, which forces me to use the public computers of a library for all of my work, and my use of those computers is limited to 2 hours per day. So I have no time for anything other than becoming acquainted with you and others and, hopefully, saying something that brightens a few moments of your lives and encourages your interest in OW.

[Peter Chapin]

Post by Wilton Helm
The biggest issue with Perforce, though, is that they are hosting us.
This is in exchange for showcasing us as an example of a large project
managed on their RCS. If we stop using heir RCS, then we would need a
new host.

GitHub could potentially be the host.

A couple of questions do exist, though... like what becomes of these
newsgroups and how are releases to be distributed? Jiri uses SourceForge
for releases. Also I'm not convinced the issue tracker on GitHub is all
that one would want. Of course I'm not convinced Bugzilla is either.

Peter

[Johann Klammer]

Post by Peter Chapin
GitHub could potentially be the host.
A couple of questions do exist, though... like what becomes of these
newsgroups and how are releases to be distributed? Jiri uses
SourceForge for releases. Also I'm not convinced the issue tracker on
GitHub is all that one would want. Of course I'm not convinced
Bugzilla is either.
Peter

Atlassian bitbucket has an issue tracker which does not require login(Github does),
and it supports attachments, too(which Github does not)... might be sthg to consider,
If you want feedback...

[Christof Meerwald]

Post by Peter Chapin
A couple of questions do exist, though... like what becomes of these
newsgroups and how are releases to be distributed?

The openwatcom.* newsgroups don't depend on the OpenWatcom server, the
groups can be accessed via third-party servers (after free
registration).

For file distribution there are a few mirror servers in place - those
only need a master server to sync with (but you can restrict downloads
from the master server, so you wouldn't need much bandwidth on the
master).


Christof

[Paul S. Person]

On Fri, 24 Apr 2015 06:11:36 +0000 (UTC), Christof Meerwald

Post by Christof Meerwald

Post by Peter Chapin
A couple of questions do exist, though... like what becomes of these
newsgroups and how are releases to be distributed?

The openwatcom.* newsgroups don't depend on the OpenWatcom server, the
groups can be accessed via third-party servers (after free
registration).

Well, maybe.

I don't see them on the two Earthlink news servers when I use
Newsgroup Directory in Agent: they appear only when the OW server is
listed.

IOW, my /client/ can find them on the OW server, but not on my ISPs
server.

Post by Christof Meerwald
For file distribution there are a few mirror servers in place - those
only need a master server to sync with (but you can restrict downloads
from the master server, so you wouldn't need much bandwidth on the
master).

The Wiki states:

Point your news reader at the server news://news.openwatcom.org and
subscribe to the groups that interest you.

which will likely stop working if the server is restricted. The only
"mirrors" listed in the Wiki appear to be download servers only.

But perhaps the Wiki needs updating.

[Christof Meerwald]

Post by Paul S. Person
On Fri, 24 Apr 2015 06:11:36 +0000 (UTC), Christof Meerwald

Post by Christof Meerwald

Post by Peter Chapin
A couple of questions do exist, though... like what becomes of these
newsgroups and how are releases to be distributed?

The openwatcom.* newsgroups don't depend on the OpenWatcom server, the
groups can be accessed via third-party servers (after free
registration).

Well, maybe.

At least albasani.net and eternal-september.org (both require free
registration) carry the openwatcom.* hierarchy, but there are others
as well.

Post by Paul S. Person
Point your news reader at the server news://news.openwatcom.org and
subscribe to the groups that interest you.

As news.openwatcom.org doesn't require any registration, that's the
easiest way at the moment...


Christof

[Paul S. Person]

On Sat, 25 Apr 2015 17:14:28 +0000 (UTC), Christof Meerwald

Post by Christof Meerwald

Post by Paul S. Person
On Fri, 24 Apr 2015 06:11:36 +0000 (UTC), Christof Meerwald

Post by Christof Meerwald

Post by Peter Chapin
A couple of questions do exist, though... like what becomes of these
newsgroups and how are releases to be distributed?

The openwatcom.* newsgroups don't depend on the OpenWatcom server, the
groups can be accessed via third-party servers (after free
registration).

Well, maybe.

At least albasani.net and eternal-september.org (both require free
registration) carry the openwatcom.* hierarchy, but there are others
as well.

Glad to hear it. But then, the Wiki would need to be altered to list
all those that do.

Post by Christof Meerwald

Post by Paul S. Person
Point your news reader at the server news://news.openwatcom.org and
subscribe to the groups that interest you.

As news.openwatcom.org doesn't require any registration, that's the
easiest way at the moment...

And the Wiki would need to be modified to change this to the list of
alternatives that include our groups, if our server is to allow
minimal downloading.

Not, mind you, that there is a lot to download. Still, our newgroups
are more active than others I have joined. Only the listserv I
subscribe to is more active.

But why on earth would we switch from Perforce? In addition to the
technical details discussed above, I was delighted when, as part of
setting up my Win 8.1 monster, after finding out that I had somehow
lost the installation file for P4Win, I found that P4Win is not only
available on the Perforce website but that they are still willing to
fix bugs (but not to add new features)! Since I am used to using
P4Win, that really helped get my OW development envirenment back up!

[Graeme Geldenhuys]

Post by Peter Chapin
A couple of questions do exist, though... like what becomes of these
newsgroups

I have been hosting some newsgroups for other open source projects for
the last 8 years. Even though I don't really use OW (other than the
wipfc program), I don't mind hosting and importing the openwatcom.*
groups into my news server. NNTP: geldenhuys.co.uk (if you want to
take a look)

Post by Peter Chapin
and how are releases to be distributed?

For years GitHub supports binary releases. It is right there in the web
interface - most people just don't seem to see it. Simply click the
"Releases" link.
eg:
* https://github.com/graemeg/xananews/releases
* https://github.com/graemeg/fpGUI/releases

GitHub also has a bug tracker, code comments (annotations) support etc.
I personally have no problem using Github's bug tracker I have add
reports for my projects (get notified via email), and made reports
against other projects. No problems, and works without issue. It's
basic, but it works.

Regards,
Graeme

[Peter Chapin]

Post by Graeme Geldenhuys
For years GitHub supports binary releases. It is right there in the web
interface - most people just don't seem to see it. Simply click the
"Releases" link.

I was under the impression that GitHub discontinued support for release
downloads and the like. Perhaps your repositories were grandfathered?
Where is this "Releases" link you are talking about? I'm not seeing it,
for example, anywhere on this page:

https://github.com/open-watcom/open-watcom-v2

Peter

[Johann Klammer]

Post by i***@gmail.com

Post by Graeme Geldenhuys
For years GitHub supports binary releases. It is right there in the web
interface - most people just don't seem to see it. Simply click the
"Releases" link.

https://github.com/open-watcom/open-watcom-v2
Peter

Along the status line at the top...
I'm seeing:

2,695 commits 1 branch 0 releases 10 contributors

[Graeme Geldenhuys]

Post by Peter Chapin
I was under the impression that GitHub discontinued support for
release downloads and the like.

Not that I know of. I've just recently made a new release for XanaNews.

Post by Peter Chapin
grandfathered? Where is this "Releases" link you are talking about?
https://github.com/open-watcom/open-watcom-v2

Like I said, most people don't seem to not see it. This just proves my
point. :-)

Below the project description is a row that shows number of commits,
number of branches, number of releases, and number of contributions.
All clickable, even thought they don't look like links. Below that is
normally a colorful bar which represents the various languages used in
the current project - also clickable. [which I only discovered the
other day].

For the above mentioned project it shows "2695 commits", "1 branch", "0
releases" and "10 contributors". Github allows you to create a release
based on a tag. Github will automatically make source code archives in
ZIP and TAR.GZ format available, at which point you can attach binary
release archives and add some release text.

Regards,
Graeme

[Graeme Geldenhuys]

Post by Peter Chapin
I was under the impression that GitHub discontinued support for
release downloads and the like.

Here is Github's documentation on creating releases.

https://github.com/blog/1547-release-your-software


Regards,
Graeme

[Peter Chapin]

Post by Graeme Geldenhuys

Post by Peter Chapin
I was under the impression that GitHub discontinued support for
release downloads and the like.

Here is Github's documentation on creating releases.
https://github.com/blog/1547-release-your-software

That's interesting. I actually did see that link in the past... quite a
while ago now. I was under the impression it just made a tag of the source
available, but I see now that it does also allow you to associate
arbitrary binary objects with a release point.

You learn something new every day.

Peter