Re: [PATCH] Allow building GIT in a different directory from the source directory
- From
Andreas Ericsson <ae@op5.se>
- Date
- Dec 13, 2006, 09:28 UTC
- Message-ID
- <457FC7A3.60206@op5.se>
- In-Reply-To
- <Pine.LNX.4.63.0612121951000.2807@wbgn013.biozentrum.uni-wuerzburg.de>
Johannes Schindelin wrote:
Show 18 quoted lines
> Hi, > > On Tue, 12 Dec 2006, Han-Wen Nienhuys wrote: > >> I still don't understand the problem with autoconf; there are already >> plenty of baroque shell scripts in GIT. I hate writing m4 macros as >> well, but that's not a problem for GIT users (ie. people who compile >> GIT). > > That, together with the complexity of GIT_EXEC_DIR and path mangling > problems, makes me take every opportunity to suggest we should build in > most if not all of Git into the "git wrapper". > > Granted, without completion scripts, the "git-" convention was nice. > > Granted, with bash, Perl and even Python, you can rapidly prototype your > thoughts (even if I often miss the power of C there). >
We could still allow that by simply not removing the "run this external program" code from the git wrapper even if we make all default commands built-ins. Pluggable git, just as it is today, and when something turns out to be useful, feature-complete and stable enough "someone" will hopefully hop in to make it a built-in.
> But in the end, I'd say it makes lots of sense to have everything in one > executable. >
Yup. Not least for portability issues. The lack of a native windows client has already made us lose at least one major "customer", and afaiu it was *only* the lack of a native windows client that caused this, so obviously it's a big issue for big cross-platform projects.
-- Andreas Ericsson andreas.ericsson@op5.se OP5 AB www.op5.se