From: Eric S. Raymond <esr@thyrsus.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Nov 2012 09:53:56 GMT
Subject: Re: Python extension commands in git - request for policy change
Message-ID: <20121125095356.GA22279@thyrsus.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAMP44s18MzmWRNRiRjL6hvpK1cm=S-97fB2ep-_0RAhnfs5cvA@mail.gmail.com>

Felipe Contreras <felipe.contreras@gmail.com>:
> If your friends jump off a bridge, would you? Yes, using python has
> served them well, but as opposed to what? Other scripting languages? I
> don't think so.

The competition that Python won was *precisely* against other scripting
languages, notably shell and Perl.  Both used to be much more heavily
used in system scripting than they are now.

> What if my extension only supports python 2.7? Or what if my extension
> wants to support 2.0?

I propose that if 2.6 can't support it, then that should be considered
grounds to reject it.

> Yes, they should _if_ they know what version they need. In my
> extensions I really have no idea.

Then you shouldn't submit those extensions to be folded into core git.

> > 3) We should be unconditionally be encouraging extensions to move
> > from shell and Perl to Python.  This would be a clear net gain is
> > portability and maintainability.
> 
> NO! It's up to the developer to choose what language to use,

I agree.  You seem to be raising a lot of straw men.  'Encouragement'
does not equate to beating anyone who makes an unpopular choice over
the head.

I am also not suggesting that the whole git core ought to be hoicked 
over to Python.  I was thinking mainly about extension subcommands, 
not what's in libgit now.
-- 
		<a href="http://www.catb.org/~esr/">Eric S. Raymond</a>