On Sat, Jul 26, 2008 at 09:37:01AM -0700, Junio C Hamano wrote:

quoted text
> Petr Baudis  writes:

>

> >   I don't know if this should have any immediate effect on how we

> > develop Git etc., but I think it is good to be aware of the fact that

> > silently, huge amount of "dark mass" Git projects is accumulating and

> > that Git is making headways in areas many of us were little aware of.

>

> The developer community and "dark matter" community are totally separate

> entities that do not interact with each other very much, and they will go

> their separate ways?  I think it is inevitable for any project once it

> becomes popular enough.

  I don't think this is inevitable. I think we are getting into this

position two few simple reasons:
  (i) The traffic on the main list is simply too high for regular users

to keep up with. If we care to get more in touch with our users,

the solution might be to spread the word about the Git Users Google

Group more, and monitor it more actively.
  (ii) The tone on the mailing list seems frequently unnecessarily

harsh. This was mentioned by some of the "dark matter" people (not Scott

himself) as the reason why didn't they announce their work on the

mailing list; fear of being flamed. Especially at the beginning of

summer when I "returned" after quite a while of inactivity, I perceived

this rather unfriendly tone rather strongly as well (not at me

personally, but reading replies to other people's contributions), though

I got kind of used to it quickly again. If we care to encourage postings

by "external" developers to the mailing list, we should keep the usual

strength of our criticism, but try to make the tone more encouraging.
> Where does this observation lead us in this "Official" git homepage

quoted text
> discussion?  Perhaps the conclusion would be that there does not have to

> be any _single_ official home?  I dunno.

  That is not good idea; this would only split the community further,

*and* create confusion as some people would be directed to homepage A,

others to homepage B, each would have its resources kept up-to-date

in different manner, ...
  Also, we need someplace to link at from git itself:
	README:Many Git online resources are accessible from http://git.or.cz/

	gitweb/gitweb.perl:our $logo_url = "http://git.or.cz/";
In case of README, we could add another link easily, in case of gitweb,

much less so.
  This ultimately comes down to what address would *you* write on

a piece of paper if someone walked to you on say, some conference

and asked you "I like Git, where can I learn more?" Or you could start

explaining how Git does not have a single homepage and start writing

multiple URLs noting the differences. Would that make good impression?
--

				Petr "Pasky" Baudis

As in certain cults it is possible to kill a process if you know

its true name.  -- Ken Thompson and Dennis M. Ritchie

--

To unsubscribe from this list: send the line "unsubscribe git" in

the body of a message to majordomo@vger.kernel.org

More majordomo info at  http://vger.kernel.org/majordomo-info.html