3 ms·

I'm all for minimizing friction for contributors, but when I read things like: "The few core developers they have do not work with modern tools like git and col

I'm all for minimizing friction for contributors, but when I read things like: "The few core developers they have do not work with modern tools like git and collaboration tools like Github", I wonder if the collaboration from someone who refuses to send a patch to a mailing list (because it is not what they are used to and don't care to learn how to do) is really worth considering. I mean: if someone is not wanting to move a few millimeters out of their comfort zone to make a contribution is, very likely, someone who has very little commitment or will try to force their opinions and methods onto others.

Kwpolska 4y ago
SQLite does not accept any patches from anyone.
- dathinab 4y ago
  It does but you have to go through the maintainers and they have to be in line with the core principles of SQLite and have the necessary code quality etc. I.e. it's hard to a point you can just say it's impossible for most people. But what the author of the article fails to mention is that many of the things libsql wants to add to sqlite are in direct conflict with the core principles of sqlite. E.g. SQLite: Max portability by depending on a _extreme_ small set of C-Standard C-Functions. libSQL: lets add io-uring a Linux specific functionality more complex then all the C-Standard C-Functions Sqlite depends on together. E.g. SQLite: Strongly focused on simplicity and avoidance of race conditions by having a serialized & snapshot isolation level without fork-the-world semantics (i.e. globally exclusive write lock). libSql: Lets make it distributed (which is fundamental in conflict with the transaction model, if you want to make it work well). E.g. SQLite: Small compact code base. libSql: Lets include a WASM runtime (which also is in conflict with max portability, and simplicity/project focus).
  - hanche 4y ago
    > It does but you have to go through the maintainers and they have to be in line with the core principles of SQLite and have the necessary code quality etc. Even so, I think they’ll prefer to rewrite the contribution. They need to be absolutely sure not to incorporate any copyright encumbered code by mistake.
    - dathinab 4y ago
      given how SQLite is used everywhere that's a pretty good idea
somat 4y ago
The irony is that sqlite uses fossil which is more modern than git. But really, I agree, the elephant in the room is that any time someone use the term "old" or "not modern enough" or "legacy" it means they have a system they don't under stand that they want to get rid of. software does not "wear out".

Kwpolska 4y ago

SQLite does not accept any patches from anyone.

dathinab 4y ago
It does but you have to go through the maintainers and they have to be in line with the core principles of SQLite and have the necessary code quality etc. I.e. it's hard to a point you can just say it's impossible for most people. But what the author of the article fails to mention is that many of the things libsql wants to add to sqlite are in direct conflict with the core principles of sqlite. E.g. SQLite: Max portability by depending on a _extreme_ small set of C-Standard C-Functions. libSQL: lets add io-uring a Linux specific functionality more complex then all the C-Standard C-Functions Sqlite depends on together. E.g. SQLite: Strongly focused on simplicity and avoidance of race conditions by having a serialized & snapshot isolation level without fork-the-world semantics (i.e. globally exclusive write lock). libSql: Lets make it distributed (which is fundamental in conflict with the transaction model, if you want to make it work well). E.g. SQLite: Small compact code base. libSql: Lets include a WASM runtime (which also is in conflict with max portability, and simplicity/project focus).
- hanche 4y ago
  > It does but you have to go through the maintainers and they have to be in line with the core principles of SQLite and have the necessary code quality etc. Even so, I think they’ll prefer to rewrite the contribution. They need to be absolutely sure not to incorporate any copyright encumbered code by mistake.
  - dathinab 4y ago
    given how SQLite is used everywhere that's a pretty good idea

somat 4y ago

The irony is that sqlite uses fossil which is more modern than git. But really, I agree, the elephant in the room is that any time someone use the term "old" or "not modern enough" or "legacy" it means they have a system they don't under stand that they want to get rid of. software does not "wear out".