Merging the kvm tool
Posted Aug 25, 2011 11:09 UTC (Thu) by mingo
In reply to: Merging the kvm tool
Parent article: Merging the kvm tool
That's exactly what we've done with tools/perf/ and it has worked very well for us.
Except for the detail that we've indefinitely postponed the 'moving out into a separate project' step:
Dependable release schedule: the kernel gives us and our users a perfectly timed, externally enforced stable release heartbeat every 3 months.
No monopoly on maintenance: we cannot abandon the repository and kill/sabotage development that way. If we make a mess of tools/perf/ within the kernel repo others will pick it up and Linus will start merging them.
Dependable development model: well-understood and constantly evolving coding style and review/discussion methodology
Easy access to early adopters: Kernel testers and kernel developers are pretty curious by nature and doing 'cd tools/perf; make -j;' is not something they are scared of trying or lazy to perform, in the kernel repository they already have anyway.
Widespread distribution: the Linux kernel is widely distributed and packaged, so it's easy for anyone to get started hacking on tools/perf/.
These are IMO some of the most important attributes of a good user-space project and by living in the kernel repository we get these benefits without having to fight much to enforce them. (Where the 'fight' would often be against ourselves.)
So I am not surprised at all that the tools/kvm/ developers (disclaimer, I write the occasional patch for tools/kvm/ myself and review their patches) are feeling about it in a similar way.
to post comments)