What is acceptable as 'open-source'? [was Python vs C++]

[Rustom Mody]

On Wednesday, August 27, 2014 5:24:40 PM UTC+5:30, Ned Batchelder wrote:
> On 8/27/14 3:50 AM, Frank Millman wrote:
> > "Ian Kelly"  wrote in message
> >> Ugh. There seems to be no public repository, and the only source to be
> >> found is from release-versioned tarballs, so there's apparently no
> >> collaboration other than some forums for reporting bugs and requesting
> >> features. All the work is done by one developer in his spare time, and
> >> he is currently on hiatus since April. Meanwhile the most recent
> >> release is February, so it's not like somebody could just pick it up
> >> and start hacking and expect to merge.
> >> That's only open-source under the most literal of definitions.
> > This is quite a timely message for me. I am inching closer to releasing a
> > version of my accounting software, and a lot of the above comments apply to
> > me as well. At present I am the only developer, and my project is not hosted
> > anywhere, so I have to decide how to make it available, and I am open to
> > suggestions.
> > I have had two attempts at running an hg repository locally, and I am afraid
> > that I am not keeping it up to date. I do have a master copy, but I have
> > made so many changes in my clone that a merge will not make any sense, so I
> > will have to start afresh. I think that making it public will be the only
> > way that I can force myself to update it regularly.

> You don't need a "local hg repo", you just need a working tree.  I 
> recommend choosing either hg or git, and then using BitBucket or Github, 
> and being done with it.

> > I could stick to hg (or git) but I have recently come across fossil, and it
> > seems ideal for my needs. Has anyone used it? It seems to have everything it
> > needs (a wiki and a ticketing system) for self-hosting, and I have my own
> > domain that I have not activated yet, so maybe I should just use fossil and
> > host it myself. Any comments?

> Fossil is one of those technologies that is very attractive in and of 
> itself, but is so under-adopted that it will itself be a barrier to 
> collaboration.  (Frankly, hg is getting to that category also.)

Some plainspeak -- Nice!

In modern society we are part users, part masters.  It may be 99% user
1% master if one is super-intelligent versatile etc -- renaissance men.

For us more ordinary folk it is more like 99.99% vs 0.01%
Eg I dont know how to repair the car I drive, build the roads they run on,
a frigging clue about the intenals of the utilities (electricity/water...)
I consume etc.  Heck this is even true of computers -- the SMPS? the Disk?

Likewise versioning systems.
We need to use them. We dont need to master all the details and possibilities.

Git has won the battle -- maybe because of the mystique around the
name 'Torvalds', maybe for sound technical reasons. It doesn't matter.
If you have better things in your life than becoming a phd in versioning,
I'd say flow with the tide and switch to git