On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 22:30, Tai Lee <real.hu...
> This seems odd to me. Django is generally a very open and community oriented
> project, which strives to consult with the community and achieve a
> consensus, resorting to a BDFL decision when necessary, after all sides have
> put their case.
You're right. Speaking as a 'developer' who has contributed something
like 14 lines of code to Django ever, evar, I think everyone should
listen to me tell you why Microsoft's Visual Source Save 5.0* is the
* It's not 'distributed' like all those new-fangled systems. Too many
people working on a project at the same time introduces bugs.
* Single point of control. Someone needs to review and test
everything. If they go on vacation for a week, development should
stop and everyone else should go on vacation too.
* Harder to fork. We don't need 50,000 forks of Django floating
around. It'd be confusing.
* Backed by a company with billions of dollars. This will ensure
innovation, and prompt bug fixing.
* Paid support. If something goes wrong with the database that stores
the code, we can hold a Django bakesale to raise money to pay for them
to recover it.
Any arguments to my points will be taken as a personal attack because
you're attacking my personal choice of RCS after all. ;)
Hopefully everyone realizes that was a joke by this point.
But seriously, getting a bunch of geeks to decide on 'the best' RCS
will go over as well as deciding on the best text editor, the best IDE
to use for developing with Django, the best desktop environment, the
best distro, the best religion, or any number of other unresolved
discussions raging on millions of forums around the internets.
I personally have invested myself in developing with Django as a
framework. As an 'end user' of the framework, I trust the core
developers to make sound decisions about its future--including which
RCS to use. They are the ones who will be most impacted by the change
* (No, I really don't want Microsoft's Visual Source Safe. Nobody wants that.)