That is the most hideous source control system ever.
Do they really need to be developer hostile just because Github is owned by Microsoft? I mean seriously, who has time to commit to a project with a random set of tooling.
Expanding Fuchsia's open source model
11–20 of 334 posts
Re: Expanding Fuchsia's open source model
#12I'm still not clear on what fuchsia is trying to be - or more specifically, why is Google developing it. What is the end goal here, from a business perspective?
an OS Google can control. Open source just like Go is open source - you are free to download and use it, but Google controls it.
Re: Expanding Fuchsia's open source model
#13That is the most hideous source control system ever. Do they really need to be developer hostile just because Github is owned by Microsoft? I mean seriously, who has time to commit to a project with a random set of tooling.
I've never worked at Google, but I've used Gerrit not infrequently at jobs and on projects--it isn't "random" even if you've never run into it before. Gitiles is just a hat on top of it; it's not pretty but it is fast.
It's not "developer hostile" to not use Github. Git works everywhere. It might mean that to contribute to an operating system a developer may have to learn how to use something that isn't Github, but honestly if that's a bar to contribution for somebody they probably weren't gonna anyway.
Re: Expanding Fuchsia's open source model
#14That is the most hideous source control system ever. Do they really need to be developer hostile just because Github is owned by Microsoft? I mean seriously, who has time to commit to a project with a random set of tooling.
Google uses GitHub for a bunch of things, I suspect it is more that the people working on it want to use Google's internal tooling as much as possible, and public user experience is considered less important than that.
Re: Expanding Fuchsia's open source model
#15Looks like you still cannot contribute without granting copyright ownership to Google. In turn, GOOG licenses it out under a BSD (or BSD-like) license. This is a big difference relative to Linux, and its part of why Linux works so well as a collaboration between competitors. The GPL's copyleft acts as a joint development agreement between equals. IMO, Fuchsia's model only works well for integration partners that are…
ADDED. Looks like this comment and its replies have no relevance to the Fuchsia project: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25348935
You used to not be able to contribute to most GNU projects (maybe you still can't) without assigning copyright ownership to the FSF.
I don't see what practical difference the assignment to Google will make. Without using the words "equality", "between equals" and "sharecropper", can you give an example of something you or I will not be able to do with the code that you or I would have been able to do if the copyright had remained with the contributors?
Re: Expanding Fuchsia's open source model
#16That is the most hideous source control system ever. Do they really need to be developer hostile just because Github is owned by Microsoft? I mean seriously, who has time to commit to a project with a random set of tooling.
Welcome to the world of Building Large Google Projects. This is somewhat painful in the Android and Dart/Flutter world. I haven't tried building Chromium yet but I'm sure it's just as complex.
Re: Expanding Fuchsia's open source model
#17Looks like you still cannot contribute without granting copyright ownership to Google. In turn, GOOG licenses it out under a BSD (or BSD-like) license. This is a big difference relative to Linux, and its part of why Linux works so well as a collaboration between competitors. The GPL's copyleft acts as a joint development agreement between equals. IMO, Fuchsia's model only works well for integration partners that are…
ADDED. Looks like this comment and its replies have no relevance to the Fuchsia project: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25348935 You used to not be able to contribute to most GNU projects (maybe you still can't) without assigning copyright ownership to the FSF. I don't see what practical difference the assignment to Google will make. Without using the words "equality", "between equals" and "sharecropper", can y…
Linux itself has never been a GNU project and has never required copyright assignment. It is the combination of features (retain ownership and GPL) together that has enabled collaboration in Linux.
Re: Expanding Fuchsia's open source model
#18That is the most hideous source control system ever. Do they really need to be developer hostile just because Github is owned by Microsoft? I mean seriously, who has time to commit to a project with a random set of tooling.
I've never worked at Google, but I've used Gerrit not infrequently at jobs and on projects--it isn't "random" even if you've never run into it before. Gitiles is just a hat on top of it; it's not pretty but it is fast . It's not "developer hostile" to not use Github. Git works everywhere. It might mean that to contribute to an operating system a developer may have to learn how to use something that isn't Github, but…
[deleted]
Re: Expanding Fuchsia's open source model
#19Earlier quoted context omitted.
ADDED. Looks like this comment and its replies have no relevance to the Fuchsia project: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25348935 You used to not be able to contribute to most GNU projects (maybe you still can't) without assigning copyright ownership to the FSF. I don't see what practical difference the assignment to Google will make. Without using the words "equality", "between equals" and "sharecropper", can y…
Linux itself has never been a GNU project and has never required copyright assignment. It is the combination of features (retain ownership and GPL) together that has enabled collaboration in Linux.
Are you saying that collaboration on Gnu Compiler Collection, binutils, bash, bison, CLISP, coreutils, etc, has been inhibited by the requirement for copyright assignment to the FSF?
Re: Expanding Fuchsia's open source model
#20Looks like you still cannot contribute without granting copyright ownership to Google. In turn, GOOG licenses it out under a BSD (or BSD-like) license. This is a big difference relative to Linux, and its part of why Linux works so well as a collaboration between competitors. The GPL's copyleft acts as a joint development agreement between equals. IMO, Fuchsia's model only works well for integration partners that are…
ADDED. Looks like this comment and its replies have no relevance to the Fuchsia project: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=25348935 You used to not be able to contribute to most GNU projects (maybe you still can't) without assigning copyright ownership to the FSF. I don't see what practical difference the assignment to Google will make. Without using the words "equality", "between equals" and "sharecropper", can y…
The FSF is a non profit organisation, Google is one of the biggest corporations. There is a big difference.