Re:Why kernel development still uses email (2016)
by Iv on Sunday October 01, 2017 @07:00AM
(#15377274)
I think a crucial point is missed: email does not have a single point of failure.
If you go through a website, a server downtime halts the development. If the mailing list crashes, patches can still be sent and some discussions kind of continue until it is resolved.
Individual email servers may fail, but it is easy to work around it. Many people have several email and other channels through which to be reached.
Also, a very important point that Linus explained was at the core of some design decisions for git: it works offline. You have your email archive offline so if you take a plan, are at a conference in a place with no internet (does still exist, sadly), are on the road, you can still go through your archives and the patches you have to examine are still available.
If you go through a website, a server downtime halts the development. If the mailing list crashes, patches can still be sent and some discussions kind of continue until it is resolved.
Individual email servers may fail, but it is easy to work around it. Many people have several email and other channels through which to be reached.
Also, a very important point that Linus explained was at the core of some design decisions for git: it works offline. You have your email archive offline so if you take a plan, are at a conference in a place with no internet (does still exist, sadly), are on the road, you can still go through your archives and the patches you have to examine are still available.