[nanomsg] Re: First nanocat release
- From: Martin Sustrik <sustrik@xxxxxxxxxx>
- To: nanomsg@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Sat, 31 Aug 2013 07:09:13 +0200
On 30/08/13 21:21, Paul Colomiets wrote:
I really think that it must be included to the nanomsg codebase for
the following reasons:
The rationale you wrote down makes perfect sense.
The reason I am reluctant to bundle additional projects with nanomsg
core library is that we've actually done that back in days of ZeroMQ 0.x
and 1.x.
Back then, all the subprojects, bindings etc. were placed in a single
repo. It turned out that it wasn't that good idea -- more for
procedural, not technical reasons.
First, with all projects bundled together, a single bug in whatever
subproject compromises (psychologically speaking) whole project. It
makes quality assurance much harder.
Take the example of ZeroMQ bindings. Once I've removed them from the
core project, the maintenance became much more easy. There are something
like 40 bindings and some of them are broken at any single time. So
what? I don't care. If they were inside a single repo I would have to
ensure that all of them are working.
Separating the projects also makes it easier for the maintainers of
individual sub-projects. They have full commit access, they decide on
their own development process and finally, they get more credit for
being real owners of the project.
In institutional terms, having a single project is like having a single
corporation with many departments, with all the heavy process and
in-fighting that results in. Having many separate projects is like
having many small and lean independent companies.
Martin
Other related posts:
