[Info-vax] Where to locate software

[Kerry Main]

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Info-vax [mailto:info-vax-bounces at info-vax.com] On Behalf Of
> lawrencedo99--- via Info-vax
> Sent: 12-Jun-16 3:59 AM
> To: info-vax at info-vax.com
> Cc: lawrencedo99 at gmail.com
> Subject: Re: [New Info-vax] Where to locate software
> 
> On Sunday, June 12, 2016 at 2:38:25 PM UTC+12, David Froble wrote:
> > Lawrence D’Oliveiro wrote:
> >> On Sunday, June 12, 2016 at 7:23:41 AM UTC+12, Stephen Hoffman
> wrote:
> >>> More than a little of what causes problems with development on
> OpenVMS
> >>> — where to place files, how to keep applications separated, source
> code
> >>> management, digitally-signing apps, etc — is handled for the
> developer
> >>> within Xcode and within OS X.
> >>
> >> If I were you, I would not use Apple’s proprietary way of doing things
> as
> >> a good model to follow. Look to Linux instead.
> >
> > What type of structured approaches does Linux offer ???
> 
> Flexibility, rather than tying you to one IDE. Open-source projects use a
> bewildering variety of build systems, all the way from a simple Makefile
> upwards to things like GNU Autotools, SCons, Ant/Gradle and who
> knows what else. The reality is, there is no single best one. CMake is an
> interesting creature: it’s actually a meta-build system, that generates
> control files for build systems. Thus, the same CMake config can be used
> cross-platform, to drive XCode on Mac, Visual Studio on Windows, and
> GNU Make on Linux. This is how Blender is built, for example.
> 
> Version control seems to be steadily coalescing around Git, though.
> Certainly, centralized VCSes are seen as obsolete these days.

"Certainly"???

While this statement may bring the politicaly correct hype generators of 
the very distributed open source world down on me, this last statement 
is a pile of crap.

Distributed source code packages certainly have a place, but there are 
also valid reasons for wanting a centralized VCS system. This statement 
was true 20 years ago and will in all likelihood be true 20 years from 
today.

Perhaps  look at some small company like Facebook and see what they
have chosen and the reasons why: VCS is Mercurial - a centralized VCS:
https://code.facebook.com/posts/218678814984400/scaling-mercurial-at-facebook/ 

Distributed VCS pkgs grew popular in the distributed world of the 90's
when every group was doing their own thing and network connections
were at best not that reliable and/or even available in many areas and
security was typically an afterthought.

Flash forward to today and you have massive IT consolidation being
implemented. This is not only server, storage & network consolidation, 
but also major DC consolidation as well.

I like to refer to this movement as "recovering from the 90's".

Here is a nice review of distributed vs centralized VCS systems: (Feb 2015)

https://bitquabit.com/post/unorthodocs-abandon-your-dvcs-and-return-to-sanity/ 
"And as a result of the efforts of people like me, we’re now seeing some 
truly insane “best practices” in the name of adopting Git.5 And mind you, 
we insist they’re “best practices”; they’re not workarounds, oh no, they’re 
what you should have been doing since the beginning. 

And that’s bullshit."

And a more recent discussion : Jan 2016
http://www.ikriv.com/blog/?p=1905


Regards,

Kerry Main
Kerry dot main at starkgaming dot com