Re: [CORRECTED PATCH] Introduce file with the common default build-time items.

From: Shawn O. Pearce <spearce@spearce.org>
Date: Jun 15, 2007, 03:22 UTC
Message-ID: <20070615032204.GC18491@spearce.org>
In-Reply-To: <20070614190739.GA3779@void.codelabs.ru>

Eygene Ryabinkin <rea-git@codelabs.ru> wrote:

Show 10 quoted lines

> Thu, Jun 14, 2007 at 11:09:29AM -0400, Shawn O. Pearce wrote:
> > Eygene Ryabinkin <rea-git@codelabs.ru> wrote:
> > No, because Junio has already stated a desire to remove git-gui.git
> > from git.git and convert it to a proper subproject by the time of
> > Git 1.6.  That means the git-gui/ subdirectory will become optional,
> > though I imagine most git-gui users will still have it.  But not
> > all Git users are git-gui users.  ;-)
> 
> OK, it means that git-gui will be totally separated from the
> git.git?  And one will download it as the separate tarball?

That's one option. But Junio and I are also considering keeping it inside the git tarball as well, as many users have gotten used to it being in the core Git distribution. I think it all depends on if myself (or someone else) adds subproject recursion support into git-archive. ;-)

No subproject recusion in git-archive will probably mean git-gui would get dropped from the core git tarball. Given we're talking about 1.6 timeframe I think we might be able to get that feature working by then.

Show 6 quoted lines

> > The best we can do is let the user pick their TCL_PATH and
> > TCLTK_PATH up in git's own Makefile, and have it pass down into
> > git-gui's Makefile when git-gui is being built from within git.
> > That is the arrangement we currently have.
> 
> OK, fine, thanks for the explanations.  The corrected patch follows.

...

Show 5 quoted lines

>  Makefile             |   17 +++++++++++------
>  common-make-vars.def |   11 +++++++++++
>  configure.ac         |    4 +++-
>  3 files changed, 25 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-)
>  create mode 100644 common-make-vars.def

...

I dunno. 25 insertions and 7 deletions to reduce two uses of 'wish' into one use of 'wish'? That hardly seems worth the additional 18 lines of code. Feels like code churn to me. And I rarely feel code churn. I'm usually a lot more caviler about changing things than Junio, Dscho, Nico, Linus, ...

-- 
Shawn.