You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@subversion.apache.org by "Hyrum K. Wright" <hy...@mail.utexas.edu> on 2010/11/07 02:34:02 UTC
How to get the message out (or: why there were only 6 people at the
ApacheCon meetup)
Last Thursday CollabNet sponsored a Subversion Meetup at ApacheCon in
Atlanta. The attendees were: Jack, Mike, me, Greg, Bob Jenkins and
one other fellow who was interested in deploying Subversion as a
ClearCase replacement. While it was a good chance to talk shop with
Mike and Greg, I'm kind of disappointed that there weren't any more
"investigators" present.
Upon further discussion, Mike and I came to the conclusion that an
event such as ApacheCon isn't the right venue for an evangelistic
meeting. In addition, holding events focused just on Subversion,
while useful (witness: elego's Subversion Day, WANdisco's Subversion
Live!, etc.), are mainly targeted at the folks who are already
committed to Subversion. People looking at switching probably aren't
going to go through the hassle to attend a single-topic event like
those.
One of the ideas we had was having meetup-type events in conjunction
with other conferences/events where the target audience already is
already there. In other words, taking the message to the people,
rather than requiring them to come to us.
My question: do we need to do this? Is there a niche that isn't being
filled by the various corporate sponsors, which we (as a Subversion
development community) are better served to do? Do people already
know "enough" about Subversion, such that we don't need to evangelize
anymore?
-Hyrum
Re: How to get the message out (or: why there were only 6 people
at the ApacheCon meetup)
Posted by Stefan Küng <to...@gmail.com>.
On 09.11.2010 18:47, Stefan Sperling wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 09:15:24AM -0800, Branko Čibej wrote:
>> On 09.11.2010 08:42, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
>>> (Honestly, when was the last time any of us got excited about some new
>>> technical thing because we read a press release about it?)
>>
>> "Oh my, another Apple Event has been announced! Whatsisname will tell us
>> why we need to buy all those revolutionary new gadgets!"
>>
>> Maybe we should do one of those events for Subversion? Anyone got a
>> black polo sweater? :)
>
> And we could give away shirts saying "iSVN".
I'd buy one :)
Stefan
--
___
oo // \\ "De Chelonian Mobile"
(_,\/ \_/ \ TortoiseSVN
\ \_/_\_/> The coolest Interface to (Sub)Version Control
/_/ \_\ http://tortoisesvn.net
Re: How to get the message out (or: why there were only 6 people at
the ApacheCon meetup)
Posted by Stefan Sperling <st...@elego.de>.
On Tue, Nov 09, 2010 at 09:15:24AM -0800, Branko Čibej wrote:
> On 09.11.2010 08:42, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> > (Honestly, when was the last time any of us got excited about some new
> > technical thing because we read a press release about it?)
>
> "Oh my, another Apple Event has been announced! Whatsisname will tell us
> why we need to buy all those revolutionary new gadgets!"
>
> Maybe we should do one of those events for Subversion? Anyone got a
> black polo sweater? :)
And we could give away shirts saying "iSVN".
Re: How to get the message out (or: why there were only 6 people
at the ApacheCon meetup)
Posted by Branko Čibej <br...@xbc.nu>.
On 09.11.2010 08:42, C. Michael Pilato wrote:
> (Honestly, when was the last time any of us got excited about some new
> technical thing because we read a press release about it?)
"Oh my, another Apple Event has been announced! Whatsisname will tell us
why we need to buy all those revolutionary new gadgets!"
Maybe we should do one of those events for Subversion? Anyone got a
black polo sweater? :)
-- Brane
RE: How to get the message out (or: why there were only 6 people at the ApacheCon meetup)
Posted by "Bolstridge, Andrew" <an...@intergraph.com>.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: C. Michael Pilato [mailto:cmpilato@collab.net]
> Sent: 09 November 2010 16:42
> To: Hyrum K. Wright
> Cc: Bolstridge, Andrew; Subversion Development
> Subject: Re: How to get the message out (or: why there were only 6 people
> at the ApacheCon meetup)
>
> On 11/09/2010 10:35 AM, Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
> > On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 9:39 AM, Bolstridge, Andrew
> > <an...@intergraph.com> wrote:
> >> I'm sure evangelical missions are still important - mainly to counter
> >> the "SVN is crap at merging, Mercurial/Git/a.n.otherDVCS is the
> >> ultimate SCM that fixes all your problems" type arguments that seems
> >> to be increasingly popular. Even our Serena dimensions admin
> >> (terrible 'enterprisey' ALM SCM) knows about git but doesn't know
> >> what SVN'd give him.
> >>
> >> So, I'd say there are still loads of poor souls needing the word
> >> bringing to them, and the FUD dispelling.
> >
> > Then aside from cold-calling all potential proselytes, what venues are
> > the best places at which to talk to folks? Are there ALM or SCM or
> > other types of conferences with which an evening Subversion event
> > would work well?
> >
> > (Or is this type of thing better left to marketing departments instead
> > of us technical peeps?)
>
> I think some of this starts with Subversion supporters being more vocal. Do
> we actually believe that "SVN is crap at merging,
> Mercurial/Git/a.n.otherDVCS is the ultimate SCM that fixes all your
> problems" is FUD? If so, we should be calling it out as such. This is not a
> battle for Marketing departments to wage, because the folks that need to
> hear the message don't care one lick for the latest output from those folks.
> (Honestly, when was the last time any of us got excited about some new
> technical thing because we read a press release about it?)
>
> Subversion didn't land on a bunch of CTOs' desks and get implemented as a
> corporate mandate. It took root with individual users who are more
> attentive to Slashdot-like buzz than press releases; folks who are more likely
> to try something based on their buddies' recommendations than on what has
> the slickest booth at a trade show. DVCS will infiltrate the current Subversion
> base in exactly the same way. If we seek to defend Subversion's relevance
> and utility, we'll have to do so in a technical communications ground war.
> And we'll have to do so while continuing to innovate and improve the
> software itself, closing down those pain points that cause our users to have
> wandering eyes in the first place.
I'm sure you've seen this:
http://www.joelonsoftware.com/items/2010/03/17.html
and the link to http://hginit.com/ that he wrote to evangelise mercurial (over svn. The links are both basically saying 'look how much better hg is over svn, even when his merging tutorial is pretty much exactly what I'd do with svn!)
*This* is what I mean by FUD.
Martin Fowler redresses the balance, but in a matter-of-fact way: http://martinfowler.com/bliki/VersionControlTools.html
In fact, he gives 3 reasons to use a DVCS:
Faster operations on history, because you have a copy of the entire repo, you can see a log quickly. Perhaps this can be solved in SVN by downloading more of the metadata (eg log) in much the same way as the last revision is stored locally to give you fast diffs.
Better management of branches - in particular, much easier to branch, work, then delete the branch as if it never was. This is analogous to developer branches in SVN, but that never show up to others - SVN can get very full of branches (and tags!) if you let it.
local development that can be committed at a later time, eg you can 'commit' even without a network.
He doesn’t include merging, which is something that everyone says is so simple and easy in a DVCS compared to "the pain that is SVN". I treat this as FUD, though usability of merging is something that could be better (as always) and tree-conflicts need to be dealt with better. I think that an enhancement such as merging 1 change to multiple branches would be truly special for a corporate who often has legacy versions to maintain.
>
> Interestingly (to me, at least), while the typical corporate user is happy to
> absorb recommendations from the blogosphere and pull those into their
> corporate environments, they are absolutely *horrific* at communicating
> back *outward*. Here is where the corporate sponsors of this project still
> have a crucial communications role to play. As the primary liaisons with that
> whole (very large) class of user, it's important that companies such as
> CollabNet and elego and WANdisco and [[insert your company here if you
> depend on Subversion, too!]] continue providing this community with insight
> into the reasons why DVCS is getting a foothold in the corporate
> environment as well as with the resources to do something about it.
>
I'll tell you that I introduced SVN into our company 2 years ago after evaluating it and a few others. Since then its migrated across the other regions and soon even our HQ in the USA will be adopting it. There have been issues (not in the regions who are happy with it, but in the US) - many of the ground-level users wanted to use something else. I'm not sure why, but there appears to be a push to use anything but. Perforce is used by one group, and the group that's now migrating to SVN tried to get Mercurial in instead. I won't speculate why, but the fact that they didn’t embrace it directly is telling. I think it has something to do with the advertising DVCSs are getting.
I know the appeal of DVCS is that you get to work on the entire repo as if you were the only developer, occasionally fetching changesets from others but basically (appearing to be) working on your own. That's diametrically opposite to the corporate appeal of SVN. If we want to 'market' SVN, do we want to emphasise this difference, or try to appeal to everyone equally?
To appeal to corporate manager types, I would like to see the main SVN website include links to all the addon ecosystem. Stuff like WanDisco, Teamforge, Polarion, etc. If I was pitching SVN to my boss, he'd want to know how it manages things like requirement traceability matrixes and change configuration control, stuff that SVN doesn't do... but is such a good platform to have these value-add extras put on top, even if they do cost $2k a seat. Perhaps this is more a Collabnet thing, but it might be difficult for them to advertise competing products.
Anyway, there's my ideas/experiences with corporate SVN. Getting the word out means making sure corporates know SVN is available, is commercially supported, and is very stable. Many managers have an antipathy towards open source so instinctively will seek out expensive (and often inferior) products. One suggested way of getting to them would be case studies - everyone feels warm and fuzzy when hearing about how someone else took the risk on, allowing you to reap the gains that are described. Statistics are good to - programmer productivity and morale are good, as are cost savings type stuff, but again, I think all the above is more the kind of thing Collabnet should be putting out. That you can get the same stuff for free is just a benefit for the clued-up dev types :)
Re: How to get the message out (or: why there were only 6 people
at the ApacheCon meetup)
Posted by "C. Michael Pilato" <cm...@collab.net>.
On 11/09/2010 10:35 AM, Hyrum K. Wright wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 9:39 AM, Bolstridge, Andrew
> <an...@intergraph.com> wrote:
>> I'm sure evangelical missions are still important - mainly to counter
>> the "SVN is crap at merging, Mercurial/Git/a.n.otherDVCS is the ultimate
>> SCM that fixes all your problems" type arguments that seems to be
>> increasingly popular. Even our Serena dimensions admin (terrible
>> 'enterprisey' ALM SCM) knows about git but doesn't know what SVN'd give
>> him.
>>
>> So, I'd say there are still loads of poor souls needing the word
>> bringing to them, and the FUD dispelling.
>
> Then aside from cold-calling all potential proselytes, what venues are
> the best places at which to talk to folks? Are there ALM or SCM or
> other types of conferences with which an evening Subversion event
> would work well?
>
> (Or is this type of thing better left to marketing departments instead
> of us technical peeps?)
I think some of this starts with Subversion supporters being more vocal. Do
we actually believe that "SVN is crap at merging,
Mercurial/Git/a.n.otherDVCS is the ultimate SCM that fixes all your
problems" is FUD? If so, we should be calling it out as such. This is not
a battle for Marketing departments to wage, because the folks that need to
hear the message don't care one lick for the latest output from those folks.
(Honestly, when was the last time any of us got excited about some new
technical thing because we read a press release about it?)
Subversion didn't land on a bunch of CTOs' desks and get implemented as a
corporate mandate. It took root with individual users who are more
attentive to Slashdot-like buzz than press releases; folks who are more
likely to try something based on their buddies' recommendations than on what
has the slickest booth at a trade show. DVCS will infiltrate the current
Subversion base in exactly the same way. If we seek to defend Subversion's
relevance and utility, we'll have to do so in a technical communications
ground war. And we'll have to do so while continuing to innovate and
improve the software itself, closing down those pain points that cause our
users to have wandering eyes in the first place.
Interestingly (to me, at least), while the typical corporate user is happy
to absorb recommendations from the blogosphere and pull those into their
corporate environments, they are absolutely *horrific* at communicating back
*outward*. Here is where the corporate sponsors of this project still have
a crucial communications role to play. As the primary liaisons with that
whole (very large) class of user, it's important that companies such as
CollabNet and elego and WANdisco and [[insert your company here if you
depend on Subversion, too!]] continue providing this community with insight
into the reasons why DVCS is getting a foothold in the corporate environment
as well as with the resources to do something about it.
--
C. Michael Pilato <cm...@collab.net>
CollabNet <> www.collab.net <> Distributed Development On Demand
Re: How to get the message out (or: why there were only 6 people at
the ApacheCon meetup)
Posted by "Hyrum K. Wright" <hy...@mail.utexas.edu>.
On Mon, Nov 8, 2010 at 9:39 AM, Bolstridge, Andrew
<an...@intergraph.com> wrote:
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: hyrum@hyrumwright.org [mailto:hyrum@hyrumwright.org] On Behalf
> Of Hyrum K. Wright
>> Sent: 07 November 2010 02:34
>> To: Subversion Development
>> Subject: How to get the message out (or: why there were only 6 people
> at the ApacheCon meetup)
>
> [snip]
>
>> My question: do we need to do this? Is there a niche that isn't being
> filled by the various corporate sponsors, which we
>> (as a Subversion development community) are better served to do? Do
> people already know "enough" about
>> Subversion, such that we don't need to evangelize anymore?
>
> I'm sure evangelical missions are still important - mainly to counter
> the "SVN is crap at merging, Mercurial/Git/a.n.otherDVCS is the ultimate
> SCM that fixes all your problems" type arguments that seems to be
> increasingly popular. Even our Serena dimensions admin (terrible
> 'enterprisey' ALM SCM) knows about git but doesn't know what SVN'd give
> him.
>
> So, I'd say there are still loads of poor souls needing the word
> bringing to them, and the FUD dispelling.
Then aside from cold-calling all potential proselytes, what venues are
the best places at which to talk to folks? Are there ALM or SCM or
other types of conferences with which an evening Subversion event
would work well?
(Or is this type of thing better left to marketing departments instead
of us technical peeps?)
-Hyrum
RE: How to get the message out (or: why there were only 6 people at the ApacheCon meetup)
Posted by "Bolstridge, Andrew" <an...@intergraph.com>.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: hyrum@hyrumwright.org [mailto:hyrum@hyrumwright.org] On Behalf
Of Hyrum K. Wright
> Sent: 07 November 2010 02:34
> To: Subversion Development
> Subject: How to get the message out (or: why there were only 6 people
at the ApacheCon meetup)
[snip]
> My question: do we need to do this? Is there a niche that isn't being
filled by the various corporate sponsors, which we
> (as a Subversion development community) are better served to do? Do
people already know "enough" about
> Subversion, such that we don't need to evangelize anymore?
I'm sure evangelical missions are still important - mainly to counter
the "SVN is crap at merging, Mercurial/Git/a.n.otherDVCS is the ultimate
SCM that fixes all your problems" type arguments that seems to be
increasingly popular. Even our Serena dimensions admin (terrible
'enterprisey' ALM SCM) knows about git but doesn't know what SVN'd give
him.
So, I'd say there are still loads of poor souls needing the word
bringing to them, and the FUD dispelling.