On Wednesday, August 9, Greg A. Woods wrote:
> [ On Wednesday, August 9, 2000 at 11:18:56 (-0600), Tobias Weingartner wrote: ]
> > Subject: Re: cvs-nserver and latest CVS advisory
> >
> > Then you are screwed. CVS was never meant to be used in this fashion. If you
> > read the original paper, I believe that it basically says that in a cooperative
> > environment, CVS works well. If you have a competitive environment, where
> > users will try to torpedo other projects, then all bets are off.
>
> Now there's a topic for discussion and research!
>
> How do you foster productivity in a competitive environment where you
> don't have anything as powerful as an employment contract to hold over
> your developer's heads?
I think you missed the point. By a fraction of a hair. Basically, I believe
that one of the fundamental premises of the original CVS paper is an environment
where cooperation abounds, rather than petty competitive and destructive forces.
There is a topic for discussion here, and quite possibly a research paper as
well, which is to see how the environment affects the CVS model of working
versioning software. IE: does the CVS model only work in a cooperative
environment, or will it also work in a competitive environment? If there are
effects, how do they manifest themselves, what are the risks, potential
for loss, etc.
> On the other hand do you really want to prevent such users from using
> underhanded techniques against their competitors, or is this simply
> another evolutionary mechanism that'll weed out the weak and ill
> prepared from the crowd? Eg. anyone stupid enough to use cvspserver
> will be taken down in the first week and the survivors will win the
> contest! :-)
Tongue in cheek, yes? IMHO, I believe that mutual cooperation will further
the "cause" of software development in general to a much higher degree,
than the darwinian bloodbath that destructive competition and weeding of
the week will ever achieve...
--Toby.
